From: doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller)
Subject: Re: ST:TNG (critiques) vs Dr. Who
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:26:00 GMT

In article <6JJVB1A3@cc.swarthmore.edu>, jhildeb1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes...
>Here we go again...
	
	Know what you mean ... time for me to jump right back in this
again

>as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik) writes:
>> And *I* want everyone to know (as if they didn't already) that there are
>> those among us who agree wholeheartedly with Michael and are physically sick
>> at the idea that the abovementioned stories might be considered
>> "masterpieces" by *anyone*. 
> 
>	Would you like an air sickness bag? Curse of Fenric happens to be
>one of my all time favorite Who episodes. A lot of people agree with me and
>have ever since it was first shown back in 1989.

	I haven't seen Fenric since I saw it in mid-1990, here in the US.
But I had no idea what was going on, until I read the excellent novelization
last year.  I want to try and find this episode again, but our TV
station doesn't show "Who" anymore, and I don't know where to find the
videotapes ...
	However, when I did see it, nothing made sense (I'll adress this
below)

>> Because before the Baker and McCoy eras, Doctor
>> Who had believable characters and coherent plots.  At least in my book, you
>> need both of those in order to qualify as a "masterpiece."
> 
>	*Flame On*
>If you are talking about anyone other than Ace with the "believable
>characters" bit then ignore this. However given your previous comments I
>suspect you are refering to Ace. When you first posted about Ace a month or
>so back a lot of people posted very good explanations of why Ace is a
>believable character and your response was "I didn't say I thought she
>wasn't believable, I just said I didn't like her." You can't have it both
>ways. Either give examples of who you are talking about in these stories who
>you don't find believable (other than Ace) or stop trying to play by this
>double standard.
>	*Flame off*

	I think Wainwright was one of the most believable characters
ever in a "Who" serial.  A Reverend, who has lost his faith in Christianity
and Mankind ... this was very excellent, and, if I think about it hard
enough, maybe I can accept the fact that they chose to kill him off.
	Helen A in "Happiness Patrol"
	Captain Cook in "Greatest Show"
	Paterson in "Survival" ...
Each of these characters were semi-believable.  They all had very human
traits (arrogance, hatred, hubris), but were painted in such a way as
to make the series more of a biting, caustic, social satire, disguised
under nonsensical stories.  In order to get at all this, you have to
be able to look at the series at different levels, and since I saw
these McCoy stories when I was 16-17, I didn't get this at all, and
the novelizations, although better than Terrance Dicks' in that they
tried to explain character motivations and stuff, weren't overly helpful.
	I'd probably have to see all these stories again in order to
appreciate the commentary bit, but since many people here are of the
opinion that it was more of UK satire (i.e. the Skinheads in "Silver
Nemesis") than universal, I might have a hard time understanding it.
	And THAT is the fundamental difference between the McCoy episodes
and the older stories.  The older stories were, for the most part,
universal.  They were proud of their British heritage, but could be
transferred to anywhere else in the world without losing anything.  Many
McCoy fans are, of course, not British, but I had trouble understanding all
this.  It seems as if the newer stories weren't mean to appeal to an
audience as wide as they used to; this is part of the series' demise.



>	As for coherent plots, I'll grant you that the end of "Greatest
>Show" seems rather incoherent. However the other three that were mentioned
>all have the similar feature that everything is there in the story, but it
>is not presented in a clear, straightforward approach of: The Doctor
>arrives, something strange is going on, the Doctor figures it out and
>explains it to everyone. Instead you have to do some reading between the
>lines in order to figure out exactly what is going on. I find this a very
>refreshing change. I can understand why some people may not like the style
>(matter of preference) but the plots are not contradictory and they are
>complete if you look hard enough. To me that means they're coherent.

	Yes, but it *is* frustrating to have the Doctor show up in
Perivale, see a black cat zip across the screen, run off to buy
cat food, and end up in another universe.  Or to have him materialize
in 1942, and know right away that he has to find Judson's Ultima 
machine or see the entire world be destroyed.  This is just too much
omniscience ... if you don't go into the story knowing that you have
to read between the lines, it's downright frustrating, and since many
people are only going to see the story once, they become hard to grasp.
	This is why I think the New Adventures could carry out the 
types of McCoy stories to greater levels.  Fenric the novel would be
a classic, but my opinion of it is damaged because the TV serial seemed
to be inferior.  Whether or not you think the dialogue was trite on TV
(and this is infinitely debatable), it'll always look better on the
printed page.
	However, when you shell out 6 bucks for _Witch Mark_, you
*definitely* lose something.  6 bucks for _Timewyrm:  Exodus_ or
for _Love and War_ (which contained, at the same time, the best
psychology and the worst plot of any WHO story ever) is much more 
worth it ...

>-Jeff
>-- 
>Jeff Hildebrand, The Shaggy TA		       	   hildebra@math.wisc.edu
>"The following statement  is an editorial viewpoint  and does not reflect 
>the views of WSRN-FM, its employees, or mutant drosophila" - Off the Cuff
>"You can't confuse us; we're not listening to you!"  -  topology students

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason A. Miller				|		"some doctor guy"
============================================================================
e-mail at:  "doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv