Continuity Hypocricy and the BBC

[kimber_mcleod]

Now we all know that Continuity in Dr. Who is blatantly a BIG Ball of Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey stuff. As in all productions and fandoms there is Canon, Soft Canon and Fannon. Traditionally Canon is anything that has made it onto film. Soft Canon is anything in alternate approved media (books, radio, comics, etc.) Fannon is Fan interpretation

Comments

[shield_wolf]

A bit late here, but I wanted to make sure that you know that someone agrees with your post, particularly because this sort of behavior sets a dangerous precedent. What if, ten years from now, a person in power at the BBC decides that it's time to do some creative editing of the RTD era in order to re-establish the Doctor as unequivocally asexual? Snip, there goes Rose ... well, perhaps not entirely, but in any way that would suggest that there was anything other than the typical Doctor/Companion relationship present between them. At least the "girls are icky" brigade in the fandom would be pleased, I suppose, but what about those of us who enjoy seeing a different approach taken to a long-established character occasionally?

[kimber_mcleod]

Exactly! They're already treading dangerous water with the Master regenerating considering he had used up all his regenerations. I haven't even heard anyone on the show mention a limit on regenerations so they could just decide that the show is making lots of money and we just won't end it at Doctor 14. There was a hard and fast rule for the first seven incarnations that the Doctor under no circumstances had non-platonic relationships with his companions. Which was fine, it was a kids show and it could get sticky, relationships being what they are. But they built the entire first episode around Rose. Hell they named it after her. The entire second season is blatant subtext of him and Rose. You can't just wake up one day and thing meh, Rose was a bad idea, she has now officially ceased to exist.

Thanks for the comment and for adding me. :D