Reminds me of Steven Sears (I think it was him, anyway) saying Gabrielle was the real hero of Xena.
I kind of see the point (a hero really isn't a hero without a sidekick to play off, rescue, keep the hero grounded, etc), but it's still kinda BS to me. The companions are important, obviously, but they come and go. The Doctor is forever.
Well, I see it as we're seeing the story from the point of view of the companions. There is still loads we don't know about the doctor, and that's why. It isn't his story, it's the companion's stories, and we see him through their eyes.
Of course, I say this having only watched maybe half of the pre-2005 Doctor Who due to availability, and what I have watched was all mixed up with no order, so I could be wrong... I've seen all of Doctor Who from 2005 forward, though.
I think it's also about character arc. When the Doctor changes, it's usually the result of a regeneration, which is not really the same thing as character development (I know it's argued that his regenerations are reactions to his previous self, and I think there's something to that; still, not the same sort of character development as what we expect). Companions change more quickly, and so it's possible to have more immediate character arcs with them. Companions also dictate a lot about the Doctor's behavior - think about Ten with with Rose, with Martha, and with Donna - he was pretty different with all of them.
I agree with Moffat that the idea of him traveling on his own is unutterably depressing. We all saw how that turned out before.
I do believe he has a very valid point. Each Companion is different, how they interact with the Doctor is different and therefore each story is different based on thier ideals, perceptions and insight. The Doctor (no matter the face) is very much the same deep down, but how we see him is based on the person standing next to him. I agree with Moffat on this wholeheartedly!
I agree with the Moff. This is why the weird BBCAmerica speech (where the companion introduces the show) never bothered me. The Doctor is far and away the star and driving force of the show, but it's the companion who learns and grows from the experience. The Doctor's more like a force of nature who can't change too much. We like him too much as he is.
And since the companion is basically the audience stand-in, it's cute that Moffat things that we (by proxy) are the main character of Doctor Who. ^^
I don't think it lessens the Doctor to think of him as NOT the main character.
Comments 18
I kind of see the point (a hero really isn't a hero without a sidekick to play off, rescue, keep the hero grounded, etc), but it's still kinda BS to me. The companions are important, obviously, but they come and go. The Doctor is forever.
Reply
Reply
Of course, I say this having only watched maybe half of the pre-2005 Doctor Who due to availability, and what I have watched was all mixed up with no order, so I could be wrong... I've seen all of Doctor Who from 2005 forward, though.
Reply
I agree with Moffat that the idea of him traveling on his own is unutterably depressing. We all saw how that turned out before.
Reply
Reply
And since the companion is basically the audience stand-in, it's cute that Moffat things that we (by proxy) are the main character of Doctor Who. ^^
I don't think it lessens the Doctor to think of him as NOT the main character.
Reply
Leave a comment