|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Aug 18, 2016 15:19:33 GMT
Retroactive Canonisation, to link the Classic and New Series era's. Yes while it was the Hand of Omega that destroyed Skaro (My mistake there), leading the Universe on the march to the Time War. Nemesis (and Validium, its main componant) is an equally powerful tool and since Nemesis destroyed that Cyber Fleet with ease (much in the same was as the Hand of Omega), It could very much be something that was possibly used during the Time War. It just hasnt been mentioned yet Cause there is no need to mention it. I'm really fed up at Showrunners and fans attempting to force a link between NuWho and Classic Who, when there isn't one. Why can't people simply enough the story, and leave it at that? |
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Aug 18, 2016 15:35:26 GMT
Cause there is no need to mention it. I'm really fed up at Showrunners and fans attempting to force a link between NuWho and Classic Who, when there isn't one. Why can't people simply enough the story, and leave it at that? Paul, links between eras of Doctor Who exist because sometimes it was intended by the writer, other times they exist because people just see them. You have no more right to insist they don't exist for the people that see them, than they have a right to insist they do exist where you don't see them. Doctor Who is many things to many people, and some people love to see the interconnecteness of the era's just as much as you hate to see it. Please, please will you respect and allow others to have different views to you? You don't have to agree, you don't even have to like it, but seriously, you do need to allow it. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Aug 18, 2016 17:41:29 GMT
Cause there is no need to mention it. I'm really fed up at Showrunners and fans attempting to force a link between NuWho and Classic Who, when there isn't one. Why can't people simply enough the story, and leave it at that? Paul, links between eras of Doctor Who exist because sometimes it was intended by the writer, other times they exist because people just see them. You have no more right to insist they don't exist for the people that see them, than they have a right to insist they do exist where you don't see them. Doctor Who is many things to many people, and some people love to see the interconnecteness of the era's just as much as you hate to see it. Please, please will you respect and allow others to have different views to you? You don't have to agree, you don't even have to like it, but seriously, you do need to allow it. Seriously, the writer of a show written in 1988, had no intention to connect it with something that wasn't written in the future. Its also MY right to protect Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts! So, please respect their work! |
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Aug 18, 2016 18:02:51 GMT
Seriously, the writer of a show written in 1988, had no intention to connect it with something that wasn't written in the future. Its also MY right to protect Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts! 1) The Norman invaders of Ireland in 1169 had no intention to connect that with 800 years of "troubles" but many people see that invasion as the origin of "the troubles". The intention of those that did something is immaterial in the context of an ongoing narrative, it is how the actions panned out and how they are seen by those that come later that matters. 2) What are you protecting Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts from? |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Aug 18, 2016 18:12:15 GMT
Seriously, the writer of a show written in 1988, had no intention to connect it with something that wasn't written in the future. Its also MY right to protect Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts! 1) The Norman invaders of Ireland in 1169 had no intention to connect that with 800 years of "troubles" but many people see that invasion as the origin of "the troubles". The intention of those that did something is immaterial in the context of an ongoing narrative, it is how the actions panned out and how they are seen by those that come later that matters. 2) What on earth do you think you are protecting Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts from? 1 is real. 2 is fictional, and none are alive to speak for them. They all wrote in the moment. I recognize that, and thats my defence. Ohh, and protecting them against people like you, who are twisting their work! |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Aug 18, 2016 19:50:39 GMT
1) The Norman invaders of Ireland in 1169 had no intention to connect that with 800 years of "troubles" but many people see that invasion as the origin of "the troubles". The intention of those that did something is immaterial in the context of an ongoing narrative, it is how the actions panned out and how they are seen by those that come later that matters. 2) What on earth do you think you are protecting Terry Nation, Kit Pedler, Gerry Davis and Barry Letts from? 1 is real. 2 is fictional, and none are alive to speak for them. They all wrote in the moment. I recognize that, and thats my defence. Ohh, and protecting them against people like you, who are twisting their work! I hardly think Messrs Nation, Pedler, Davis or Letts require protecting. Their work stands on it's own (including faults). ----- Moderation ----- People are allowed to have their own views and Head Canon, it doesn't have to match every body else's and no one has to agree with it but we DO have to respect them! That includes you Paul! ----- End Moderation ----- Cheers Tony |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Aug 18, 2016 20:05:18 GMT
1 is real. 2 is fictional, and none are alive to speak for them. They all wrote in the moment. I recognize that, and thats my defence. Ohh, and protecting them against people like you, who are twisting their work! I hardly think Messrs Nation, Pedler, Davis or Letts require protecting. Their work stands on it's own (including faults). ----- Moderation ----- People are allowed to have their own views and Head Canon, it doesn't have to match every body else's and no one has to agree with it but we DO have to respect them! That includes you Paul! ----- End Moderation ----- Cheers Tony Apparently, it doesn't stand on its own when fans connect it with stories written 20 years later! You don't appear to respect the original story |
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Aug 18, 2016 20:18:14 GMT
Ohh, and protecting them against people like you, who are twisting their work! How do you know that your interpretation of their work is the one true interpretation? Also do you know that quite aside from your day to day consumers of fiction, who take from it what they will, that there are huge bodies of academic works devoted to interpretation and meaning of fictional works. Many authors themselves state that what their stories are about is down to the person reading/listening/watching, indeed I recall one of the BF writers saying as much about thier work here on this forum. You are not defending authors from having their works twisted, you are trying to impose your view on others. |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Aug 18, 2016 20:24:10 GMT
1 is real. 2 is fictional, and none are alive to speak for them. They all wrote in the moment. I recognize that, and thats my defence. Ohh, and protecting them against people like you, who are twisting their work! Apparently, it doesn't stand on its own when fans connect it with stories written 20 years later! You don't appear to respect the original story Ok, this starting to get silly. Not ALL fans connect it to other stories therefore my original post stands. Also, I'm not sure how saying respecting other viewpoints has anything to do with the original story. After all, I am talking about respecting other people's (and more specifically) forum member's views whether you agree with them or not. For instance, I don't like the Character Missy, but I respect other people's right to like the character. Respecting different viewpoints actually has nothing to do with the stories. Cheers Tony |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2016 2:13:05 GMT
Apparently, it doesn't stand on its own when fans connect it with stories written 20 years later! You don't appear to respect the original story Ok, this starting to get silly. Not ALL fans connect it to other stories therefore my original post stands. Also, I'm not sure how saying respecting other viewpoints has anything to do with the original story. After all, I am talking about respecting other people's (and more specifically) forum member's views whether you agree with them or not. For instance, I don't like the Character Missy, but I respect other people's right to like the character. Respecting different viewpoints actually has nothing to do with the stories. Cheers Tony I can safely say that this has been an ongoing discussion outside of Doctor Who in general literature since at the very least least 1967. A chap called Roland Barthes who argued against traditional literary criticism which incorporated biographical information of an author into a text and stated that each work of fiction should be able to stand up on its own merits in a vacuum. It's a method of approaching criticism that's become known as Death of the Author after the essay and I'm personally a big fan of it because the original intent of a work often gets overridden by a variety of audience cultural contexts. The "Leave the sowing to the women," line in Disney's Cinderella or Rudyard Kipling's The White Man's Burden can raise a few eyebrows now because social norms towards such attitudes have altered considerably, but that contemporary day interpretation of the film isn't any less valid than one made at the time, merely one that is different. Someone sitting down and watching North by Northwest and thinking -- "Hey, this feels quite a lot like a Bond film," isn't any more incorrect than someone sitting and going -- "Huh, this new Bond flick feel a lot like that Hitchcock thing with Cary Grant we saw a while back." That's not even getting into when authors change their mind on their intentions. That's not even getting into authors who have actually changed their views on what was written. It's all transitory and it needs to be open to change and evolve through other works in order to survive, otherwise it stagnates and in that stagnation the ideas of the work die a lonely death. All fiction is based on the circulation of thought, it's why we have continuity in the first place. If nothing changes then we might as well be Cybermen. |
|
|
|
Post by elkawho on Aug 19, 2016 3:20:45 GMT
^^If only I could like this post more than once.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2016 3:39:04 GMT
^^If only I could like this post more than once. Thank you kindly. ^_^ |
|
|
|
Post by Timelord007 on Aug 19, 2016 10:50:27 GMT
I feel like i joined a movie halfway through, have i missed something?
|
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Aug 19, 2016 11:22:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Aug 19, 2016 12:54:32 GMT
And i only originally talked about the posiblity off hand lol. It was an idea that was all.
Doctor Who has contradicted itself on many occasions and then re-contradicted itself to go back to the original point. Many of the writers themselves have done that. Nation himself in bringing Davros back from the dead and then John Peel (Not that one) when he wrote War and Legacy of the Daleks.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Aug 19, 2016 14:44:35 GMT
I feel like i joined a movie halfway through, have i missed something? A fistfight over whether Vader said "No, I am your father" or "Luke, I am your father", apparently. |
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759 
|
Post by bobod on Aug 19, 2016 15:15:34 GMT
Doctor Who has contradicted itself on many occasions and then re-contradicted itself to go back to the original point. Many of the writers themselves have done that. Nation himself in bringing Davros back from the dead and then John Peel (Not that one) when he wrote War and Legacy of the Daleks. Don't talk about people coming back from the dead! He HATES that. |
|
|
|
Post by coffeeaddict on Aug 19, 2016 15:37:13 GMT
And for the lighthearted moment this thread needs...
"cannon to the left of them, cannon to the right of them, cannon in front of them."
|
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Aug 19, 2016 15:44:53 GMT
And for the lighthearted moment this thread needs... "cannon to the left of them, cannon to the right of them, cannon in front of them." "Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking." ? ? |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Aug 19, 2016 16:20:23 GMT
Volley'd and thunder'd;
Storm'd at with anger and Canon,
Boldly they moaned and bitched,
Into the jaws of Fandom,
Into the Mouth of Hell
Rode the Whoniverse.
Couldnt resist sorry
|
|
