HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mrmuon@next03epsl.wam.umd.edu (Eli John Hawkins)
Subject: Re: Hartnell-Troughton Regeneration Sequence
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:51:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.053933.21773@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>  
bv925@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Robert J. Corrigan) writes:
> 
> I've seen all the regeneration sequences except the first, and
> they've been totally different each time.
> 
> What did the first one look like? I DON'T want to spend ~$20 just
> for that one clip on "The Troughton Years!"

It was a simple fade, essentially the same as the Pertwee-Baker  
regeneration. I think the last three regenerations were done essentially  
the same way, except for the watcher in 4-5.
Obviously the changes were a matter of special effects availiablity and  
budget. I rather like the look of the recent regeneration sequences.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: carter@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Carter Bennett)
Subject: Re: What Dalek book should I read???
Summary: "Genesis of the Daleks"
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:54:00 GMT
Organization: CompuTrac Inc., Richardson TX

In article <1992Aug26.133422.19330@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mfh@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (mitchell.hansinger) writes:
>I haven't read any novels about the Daleks, or about Dr. Who for that matter,
>and would like to know which one is best.  I would like to learn about the
>following things in the course of reading about the daleks :
>
> [lots of Dalek-related questions deleted]

Just about all of your questions are answered in the book "Genesis of the
Daleks," which is in the Tom Baker doctor series.

Following that, you might want to get "Day of the Daleks," though I don't
remember all of that one.

"Genesis" is pretty neat because it goes back to the time when the Daleks
are being created by Davros, but the Doctor has been dealing with the
daleks for a long time.

Carter R. Bennett, Jr. - Scientist      No matter where you go...
carter@scilab.lonestar.org                 .../dev/tty!
KI5SR
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: mrmuon@next05pg2.wam.umd.edu (Eli John Hawkins)
Subject: Re: The Three Doctors comments
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:25:03 GMT

In article <l9i75eINNrov@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> rmp@crashnburn.Eng.Sun.COM  
(Richard Pottorff) writes:
> In article <1992Aug23.083742.2351@cs.ucf.edu> wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom  
wilson) writes:
> 
> >Also another possible first timer: Doctor 2 mentions jelly babies - is  
this
> >the first time they are mentioned? 
> 
> Toward the end of the last episode of Robot, the first Tom Baker Dr. Who
> story, he gives Sara Jane Smith some jelly babies to placate her because
> she's upset about what happened to the Robot.  He also offers some to
> Harry Sullivan, then takes what he hasn't eaten back when he disparages 
> the Tardis about just being a telephone box.

This probably is the first time the 4th Doctor has jelly babies, but  
"Robot" was two years after "the 3 Doctors".
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: bn823@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter Mullaney)
Subject: Re: PBS & SCIFI CHANNELS
Reply-To: bn823@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter Mullaney)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 18:14:31 GMT


In a previous article, glreno@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Gerald Reno) says:

>
>I think that it may have just been:
>1) the TARDIS runs better with a two-member crew (It was designed for six,
>   after all) or

If this is true why do people keep talking about a 'symbiotic' link between
TARDIS and 'owner'?

>2) Romana was a better pilot
>

-- 
: Pete Mullaney              :  Always do right.  This will gratify       :
:                             :  some and astonish the rest.               :
:                             :      Samuel  Langhorne Clemens             :   
:                             :      aka Mark Twain                        :
From: ekho.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Red Dwarf (was Re: Americanizing of the UK,.....)
Date: 29 Aug 92 04:48:01 GMT
Organization: Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton


  I just wandered into my local new/used bookstore and to my utter horror 
and delight, a book rudely hit me over the head! ;))    After
recovering, I read the title once again just to make sure... Yup... It is 
titled, "Red Dwarf:  Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers"!  I looked at the 
back and inside cover in disbelief... Yup... It is about those Smegheads 
Lister, Rimmer, Holly, and company.  It is written by Grant Naylor, and 
it costs $4.99 in the U.S. ($5.99 in Canada).  I haven't read it yet, 
needing the entire day and night (this happened yesterday by the way) to 
recouperate. ;}  Hope it's good!

  Stay Safe!

         Yours in Time and Space,

             Ekho (Killer Queen, Dynamite with a Laser Beam)
From: neal@RIEMANN.MATH.MUN.CA (Neal Crossan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Production company chosen?
Date: 1 Sep 92 16:13:11 GMT

From the latest issue of The Frame, in an interview with former script editor
Anthony Root;

   Frame: How do you feel about the fact that the show's future is once again
          in the balance at present?

   AR: Well, interestingly enough, when I heard about that, and the fact that 
       the BBC were looking for an independent company to take over production
       I immediantly wrote to say that I thought that we could do a good job
       on it here at Working title and that I had some ideas about it.  But
       Peter Creegan, Head of Series, said that he'd already secured the
       company that was going to do it.
   
   F: Really?
  
   AR: Yes.  That was about six months ago and I keep expecting to see an
       announcement.


      -Neal Crossan-
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Return of the Doctor
Date: 27 Aug 92 18:14:07 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Aug27.170351.11372@ioe.ac.uk> teexijd@ioe.ac.uk (IAN DAVENPORT) writes:
>Let's not exaggerate here. You would appear to be the unique fan which has
>not seen a stomach-turning episode? Everyone seems to have differing
>opinions on this, but surely no-one really liked such dross as Timelash
>or Time  and the Rani ?

You'd be surprised.  The recent DWIN newsletter actually had a defense
of Timelash.  And I remember, when Season 24 first made it over here I
was so starved for new Who that I actually *liked* Time and the Rani.
Thank God I recovered.  :-)

>IMHO a new DW series should make a clean break with the old one.

How clean?  To the point of throwing away the character development of
the past two seasons?  That's the proposal of the McCoy-bashers that
most worries me.

> From what
>I hear, all the standard sets will have to me remade, and so probably
>redesigned too.

Standard SET, singular.  The only regular set they had was the TARDIS
console room, and all they have left of that is the console itself.

> Should they really try to carbon-copy the old series, or
>should there be sweeping changes in the look of a new show?

How sweeping a change can you have with one standing set?  Every story
of Doctor Who looks pretty much different from every other anyway.

> I'm not saying
>that the basic premise of the show should be altered, but a redesign
>surely wouldn't go amiss? At the least, they should get rid of those
>dopey BBC micro screens in the main console, boy they sucked.

I'd have no problem with a spruced-up console room -- after all, look
at what a refreshing change The Five Doctors was.  Still...  I don't
think change for change's sake is that necessary.
Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Tuesday, 25 Aug 1992 14:56:31 EDT
From: <34ZBTXQ@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: TIME LORD RPG

 I found the TIME LORD RPG-the new Dr. Who roleplaying game. It's a fast,
simple little game, but is quite fun. It has no character creation system or
experience point system, but I've made one up if anyone wants it; e-mail me and
I'll give it to you. The game is put out by Doctor Who Books, a division of
Virgin Publ. LTD., and can be obtained at the same source where you get WHO
paperbacks. It's a fun way to have new adventures while waiting for the series
to return. WHO gamers will like this game; it's much more accurate to the TV
series than FASA's game was, and MUCH easier to play.
From: lazarus@maico.ksu.ksu.edu ()
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Sixth Doctor
Date: 4 Sep 1992 00:44:35 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: maico.ksu.ksu.edu


In article <1992Sep3.111209.26482@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, riff@coos.dartmouth.edu (Christopher P. Riff) writes:
>I don't have the Programme Guide handy, but I beleive that the Twin 
>Dilemma was part of the same season as the final Peter Davison stories,
>so it wasn't the only story of the season (although it was the only
>Colin Baker story.)

Actually, come to think of it, that's probably right.  Now that I think about it,
Davison's run was something like one story shy of a season...

--
Bart -Laz- Smith
Kansas State University
The 'Cats WILL rule in '92!
"You're too young and I'm too well hung..." -- Spinal Tap
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: trump@iastate.edu (The Trumpster.)
Subject: Re: NEED VIDEOS OF THE FIRST
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:41:44 GMT


Doug Vermes (acc1bbs@ssr.com) once said:

> This request may be in vain, as Iain Robert Asplin most surely
> will tell everyone NOT to answer this request, in case you
> are an agent of the BBC or something like that.
>
>
>      - Doug

Hee hee hee. Can I second the notice of Iain's paranoia, or will I be chastised
for opening my mouth again?

Frank
trump@iastate.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson)
Subject: Re: What happened?
Organization: University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 06:52:41 GMT

dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) wrote:
>In article <1992Aug23.045226.1210@cs.ucf.edu> wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) writes:
>>joe.siegler@satalink.com (Joe Siegler) wrote:
>>>DN|  Perhaps an American producer should take it over and do it now... 8)
>>>I think I'd rather have it stay dead.
>>"Bad"
>>Dr. Who would be better than none. Truth of the matter is, if the proper
>>people are behind the scenes (for continuity, etc.), it could be quite good.
>>The Doctor isn't really English (only the actor) and why are the companions
>>limited to English or outer space (I think Peri is American). Certainly there
>>would be more money put into the show. The only tie to England necessary is
>>the police box.

>a) "Bad" Dr. Who would certainly be worse than none at all; b) I think
>you fail to realise that Dr. Who is a quintessentially *English*
>programme. It's nothing to do with the nationality of the actor(s),
>it's entirely to do with attitudes. Letting anyone else do Dr. Who
>would be to produce an entirely different show.

Same thing I said originally: you want to deny everyone else just because you
don't like it. I don't watch a lot of programs on TV, therefore they should
be taken off the air. Screw everybody else! That's the impression I get.

It's not an English program if it's not produced at all. That's the point. If
no one in the England picks up production of the show, I would rather see an
American version than none at all. So what if it's different. NONE is different
too.

>>Oh well, it ain't gonna happen, at least not for a while. There is something
>>wrong with a preconceived dislike though.

>It's not necessarily "preconceived dislike", it's just the awareness
>that nobody who wasn't born and brought up in England during a
>particular period would produce something recognisable as Dr. Who.

It's still a preconceived dislike. Without even seeing what could be produced
over here, you don't like it. If you think it would be like some other shows
that are redone, you are stereotyping which is again a preconceived dislike.
Admit it. Even if such a production lived up to your expectations, exercise
your free will and DON'T WATCH IT. Don't deny others a free choice just because
you don't agree with the choice.

Finally, it would be a recognizable Dr. Who if, like I said, the right people
were behind the scenes. The creators of Red Dwarf were in on the production of
the American version (if I remember correctly), yet a bunch of people downed
the show without ever seeing it. Too bad for those of us who would have watched
it with an open mind.

Tom
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: What happened?
From: ace@kryton.UUCP (Catherine Beckstead)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 11:14:30 PDT
Organization: Paradox Alley F&SF BBS 805-492-8789
Keywords: Underpinnings, cultural, opinions...

sarah@micom.com (Sarah Menolly) writes:

> 
> Why? The Doctor deals with all, being the penultimate embodiment of
> a hope for the future -- being non-judgemental of any one/being, respecting
> all forms and stages of life in its miraculous multiplicity with acceptance a
> current. We just aren't old enough.

What do you mean we can't do all that?  You mentioned Star Trek, isn't
that what Gene Roddenberry was trying to say/do?  Sounds more like
the prime directive to me.  So that idea isn't particularly English, nor
is it American.  Actually it is an idea born out of the time when both
series were created, the sixties.  Although it has even more merit now,
almost 30 years later, since we still have quite a bit of racism.  We still
look to a future where all people no mater what are considered equal and 
treated well.  So when it comes right down to it, what are we saying here?...
oh I know, Gene Roddenberry was a time lord.  It all makes sense now.  <really
big grin inserted here>


> Well, I've said my say, and by the way, Hello! I'm new to this group.
> :-)!

So am I, so hello to you and everyone else on this group.



-------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Beckstead                    ace@kryton.uucp
"Do you want to argue with a can of deodorant that registers
NINE on the Richter scale?"        --Ace, in "Dragonfire"
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: New(?) Rumours
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:09:24 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Aug26.173958.16509@wam.umd.edu> mrmuon@next05pg2.wam.umd.edu (Eli John Hawkins) writes:
>In article <2737@nlsun1.oracle.nl> gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary  
>Bradley) writes:
>>     I doubt Verity Lambert would have time given she now handles
>> Eldorado (the Beeb's new mega-expensive mega-flop soap opera set in
>> Spain) full time. And if Eldorado is cancelled (and any sane BBC
>> controller would cancel it now to at least save face, and minimise loss)
>> would you let anyone who was involved with it near a new show????

>A: DW is not a new show.
>B: She helped create Doctor Who and I would trust her with it more than  
>_anyone_ else.

Sorry, Eli.

A: If DW were to come back, it _would_ be a new show, just like ST:TNG was
a new show.  A new show with a tremendous back story, but a new show.  There
will almost definitely be no connection in cast or crew with the first 26
years of the run.  How much more "new" can you get?

B: Did you ever hear about her proposed changes when she first floated a bid
to produce Who?  She expressed her extreme discontent with the direction it
had taken under Andrew Cartmel and wanted to get away from the dark,
manipulative Doctor of recent years.  A production philosophy which would
not allow for "Remembrance of the Daleks" or "Curse of Fenric" would be a
step backward, IMHO.
From: mrmuon@next15epsl.wam.umd.edu (Eli John Hawkins)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: What Dalek book should I read???
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:28:13 GMT
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Aug26.224732.17786@news.iastate.edu> trump@iastate.edu  
(The Trumpster.) writes:
> In article <1992Aug26.133422.19330@cbfsb.cb.att.com>  
mfh@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (mitchell.hansinger) writes:
> >1)  What was Davros' purpose in creating the daleks?  ie what did he  
want to
> >accomplish/hope to obtain?
> 
> He didn't mean to create them. His people were suffering and mutating  
from
> radiation, and he wanted to accelerate the process to see what the final
> form would be, and he was horrified to discover it was a hideously  
deformed
> monster. His people were at war, and he decided to use them to fight. He
> removed all emotions from them and cased them in moveable exoskeletons.
Davros wasn't horrified. Davros was a hideously deformed monster himself.  
He preferred Daleks to Kaleds; when the Kaled government tried to halt  
Davros's experiments he helped the Thals to destroy the entire Kaled race.


> Davros wasn't really all that bad of a guy.
I beleive it was in "Destiny of the Daleks" (that or "Genisis") that the  
Doctor asked Davros if supposing he had a capsule of a virus that would  
destroy all life, would he use it? Davros said yes.
From: quiz@nemesis.UUCP
Date: 02 Sep 92 23:11 CDT
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: FIRST STORY TO USE A FACE IN TITLES
Message-ID: <-403779@nemesis>
Nf-ID: #R:cs.utexas.edu:16393:nemesis:-403779:000:2025
Nf-From: nemesis.UUCP!quiz    Sep  2 23:11:00 1992


<>
[1]Incorrect.  "The Macra Terror" was the first story to feature the new
[1]Patrick Troughton title sequence and, thus, the Doctor's face.
[1]
[1]The surviving John Cura telesnaps from this story include 2 of the title 
[1]sequence. They show the Troughton sequence.  Also if you listen to the audios
[1]of this story (NOT the commercial releases - the themes were re-dubbed for
[1]these) you will notice the theme is the slightly jazzier version which
[1]accompanied the Troughton-face titles.
[1]
[1]The telesnaps were published in DWB 97, I think.

I believe we have already had a posting saying DWB posted a correction
some months later.  There are references in at least equally authoritative
publications, saying it was The Faceless Ones, some of which I would certainly
trust over DWB any day.  Example:

I quote from Files Magazine, Season Four: Part II, by John Peel (Page 32
if you are interested)

	"This story also marked the first time that the title sequence
	 for the story was changed.  Until this point, the same
	 titles used for the very first William Hartnell show had been
	 constantly used.  Now this was changed, and with episode one
	 of "The Faceless Ones", a new one was designed and used by
	 Bernard Lodge, and the Doctor's face was formed for the first time
	 in the sequence.  The original theme was also rerecorded and
	 rearranged slightly to fit the title sequence.  Since that point,
	 it became fairly acceptable for such changes to be made from time
	 to time - they were changed twice in the Pertwee and twice
	 again in Tom Baker's time."
	
And:

[-]This certainly wouldn't be the first time DWM has got something a bit
[-]wrong.  Here's an excerpt from Peter Haining's "Key to Time:"
[-]April 8 - The first appearance of the now-familiar title graphic
[-]for te show featuring the Doctor's face - in the perhaps inappropriately
[-]titled story - ""The Faceless ones" by David Ellis and Malcolm Hulke!

How do we know that these clips you mention they have were simply misfiled?

@x
From: juoncatherin@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Long live Sylvester McCoy
Date: 27 Aug 92 08:56:57 CDT
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA

Is Sylvester McCoy the right doctor?

Being new to this network thing, I really don't know much yet.  But one 
thing that I do know is that Doctow Who is the all time greatest TV show, 
period.  From 'An Unearthly Child' to 'Rememberance of the Daleks', nearly 
every episode has been fabulous.  And the doctors (with the due and 
justified exception of Colin Baker) have averaged about four years apiece.  
So why should Sylvester McCoy be replaced if Doctor Who starts up again?  
That seems to be what everyone is saying.  Give the guy a chance!  I think 
he is one of the three best we've had yet.  He deserves at least another 
two seasons.  That's all.
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Thursday, 27 Aug 1992 13:21:27 CDT
From: <U37426@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: bring me up to date

     I used to watch Dr. Who many years ago during the Peter Davidson  era.
I was a big fan for a while but then gradually stop watching.  I ran across
this news group and found my interest reborn.  A quick look at the TV guide
shows that the show is no longer carried in Chicago!!  My question is this:
What is going on over there in England?  From what I read here it seems that
the show has been canceled.  How long has this been?  Is it permanent?
Any news would be most welcome.   Please reply direct.  Thanks.

....................................dogbert..........................
....................................................................
From: ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: In Search of Dr. Who Prequel stories/ Trek/Galactica/Who mixes, also.
Date: 27 Aug 92 21:16:00 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <BtnCDM.Kpx@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> falatic@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (MacGyver) writes:
>the same stories! :) 
>	One thing I haven't seen much of is detailed prequels that explain the
>relationship between the Doctor and the Master and Susan, etc. I saw a story
>in an old magazine (during Davison's time) which had the Doctor confronting 
>the Master and Susan was identified as some sort of royalty from Gallifrey.
>Of course, I am sure what's out there is not very canonical, but I still
>am VERY interested!
>
>   				-Marty
>
This story you are referring to appeared in the 20th Anniversary Special
magazine that was printed in the States by Starlog, and I don't know
who printed it in the UK, most likely Marvel I would think.
This story was written by ERic Saward, and to me it is a load of rubbish.
The Susan stuff was the worst of all.  Mister Saward felt adamantly that
SUsan was *not* the Doctor's blood granddaughter, and I see no basis
whatsoever from any quarter for that assumption.  If a future TV story
comes along and says she wasn't, then I'll think it's a shame but I
will accept it as canon.  Until then, I won't take that as read because
I think it closes up some good plot possibilities, such as a story
where the Doctor meets up unknowingly with one of Susan and David's
kids.  A sort of Doctor Who: Back to the Future.
From: teexijd@ioe.ac.uk (IAN DAVENPORT)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: An idea for the return of our favouring show
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:07:31 GMT
Organization: Institute of Education, University of London

In <1o64PB3w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:

>I though of something nostalgic.  When the show does return, why not a trial
>run of 3 seasons of 48 25-minutes episodes.
>The show is now popular and when returned, merchandise sales should increase in
>volume.

Whoooaaa!

While only 4 weeks off a year is a bit of a hearken back to the early days,
surely you're not seriously suggesting that any program could maintain
watchable quality for seasons that long???

Besides, no british tv company would fund a year-long show that wasn't a
soap, or at least cheap and very popular. I hope DW falls into none of
these categories when(if) it returns. Hey, how about a prod'n company
producing DW just for video release? No TV release... would the return
justify the cost??  I only think of this because of BBC enterprises going
further and further down the road of production - most noticably with SHADA.

Ian J Davenport   MULLARD SPACE SCIENCE LABORATORY   ijd@uk.ac.ucl.mssl
           - A real space lab, only the people are fictional.

>Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
>userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
>God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
>cowboy (n): A 20th Century extension of  the neanderthal caveman.