This may be extrapolating the trend a little much. :) I don't think I've seen anything he's been in (maybe a few minutes of the pullman stuff) But then there's very few of the Doctors that I've actually seen in stuff before I saw them as the Doctor. Sylvester McCoy I think is the only one I remember having seen in stuff before.
They seem to think he gave a good interpretation of the role, and the rest of us will just have to wait and see what new slant he brings to the role, while maintaining the essential Doctorness.
but if he's a foetus, he'll be the most powerful thing alive!
I'm finding it hard to articulate to people that I am deeply disappointed with the choice based on available evidence (he could've been black, he could've been Asian, she could've been a woman, but instead they picked the young David Tennant by the looks of things), yet am reserving judgement until I actually see Smith in action.
The one thing I didn't think they should've done after Tennant was make him younger. To me the Doctor works best as a middle-aged man - the weird uncle that the kids like. While I like both Davison and Tennant as the Doctor, I still think they were too young. Now they've gone even younger.
I used to want to be an actor so I could play Doctor Who. Today I've woken up to learn I'm too old to play Doctor Who. : )
I've thought black, Asian, a woman is all too far from where we've been, but that still doesn't leave us with a lack of choice. There are some fab actors out there. And if they had cast someone who was a different gender or nationality, I'd still be interested in how it would be dealt with.
My biggest issue with an actor so young playing the Doctor is that there would be many people who wouldn't listen to him, where an older Doctor can at least fake the maturity as he takes over.
That said, I'd hope Moffat would take it way Davison tried to play it - the old man trapped in a young body. That could be really interesting. And a Doctor who no-one listens to because he looks too young could be interesting as well.
But I agree about the middle-aged, weird uncle type. And I felt old when Tennant came in, you young bastard!
I wanted him to be Ginger. *sniffs*
That joke is not getting old any time soon, is it? It's bloody everywhere!
Hell no. :)
It's time for a change, anyway.
Having some doctors of new and interesting ethnicities would be interesting (although you'd, I think, lose something if they weren't essentially British at heart), but I'm a staunch opponent of a female Doctor. You can't gender-swap the role and have it still be the same character. I'd love to see more female Time Lords, I'd be there in an instant for The Further Adventures of Romana, but outside of Elseworlds tales and comedy specials the Doctor should remain eternally male.
IMO there is no reason not to have a female Doctor other than:
(a) being against change in general,
(b) being sexist.
I'm going to have disagree with you. You can't just yell sexist or racist because some one believes that the Doctors character is essentially a white male.
IMHO the Doctor is male and white, and should remain that way. That isn't to say that a black woman couldn't (or wouldn't) be great a Doctor, but the Character is what he is, you shouldn't just chuck out 30 years of back story on a whim. It would seem that your advocating change for the sake of change.
What I am saying is that we're talking about the only long-running TV drama where you can do *anything*. Having the central character collapse in the TARDIS in '66 and wake up as Patrick Troughton was revolutionary. It's a show where one story is about an alien war on another planet, another can a historical adventure in the 18th century and a third could be about the Doctor having conversations with Gulliver and Rapunzel, and you could run all three in a row and it would not only not look out of place, but would seem like par for the course.
And for parts of the viewership to look at a show that changeable, random and gloriously mad, and to say "X could not ever happen" or "Y would be a terrible, terrible idea", is something that I think runs very counter to the spirit of the programme.
I don't disagree that anything can happen, I question why something should happen. I believe that show has to remain internally consistent, I really don't see that gender swap would be anything but a stunt. Fundamentally the Doctors character is asexual (at least until recently) being male/female or anything else shouldn't affect the character. So I just don't see a need mess with it.
I'm sure a talented writer could give a plausible reason for any change you might want to make to the Character. But I've been watching since I was 3, it is in fact the first thing I remember watching, so I want his future direction and decisions to remain consistent with all (well maybe most) of his previous choices and actions.
Is there some reason you think the Doctor should have been a woman?
People react in different ways to people of different race and gender - there are story possibilities. That's the reason to do anything in Doctor Who - because there's a story in it.
One of the problems Doctor Who has is that due to its structure - educated middle-aged man accompanied by audience-surrogate young woman - it's effectively Pygmalion in space. It's an inherently sexist programme. The production team can adjust it a bit, they can work on making the companion more of an equal (which has only been properly done once with Romana II), but the structure is always there. Having the Doctor be a woman with a young male companion for a few years would be a refreshing break out of the box in that regard.
But the bottom line? Because there's a story there.
Also I have to say that if I was in charge of the show, part of me would want to cast a woman just to watch a good third of Who fandom implode.
Well its probably my selfish streak, how many shows have a white male flying through space solving problems with intelligence and compassion, a principled caring man doing good things.
In this post-whedonesque sf world their are very few strong male characters for young boys to identify with, I think keeping the Doctor the way he is worth doing for that reason alone.
Certainly not non-violent ones.
2009-01-09 03:55 am (UTC)
The Doctor is a parental figure. A female Doctor would be, to me, like a parent getting a sex change - great if that's what they want, but more than a little confusing to me as a person. That is, fair enough, ultimately my problem, and it's a concept that's worth exploring in a fictional setting, but I'm ultimately coming to Doctor Who because of its tradition of exploring macro-social issues through the allegory of monsters rather than its tradition of exploring psycho-sexual hangups through the allegory of regeneration.
Put that stuff in Torchwood and I'll quite happily go watch it there, but let the Doctor do what the Doctor does without complicating things, please. A show does not have to do everything a little and be brave in every direction - it needs only do what it was designed for very excellently, and go about that focus without fear.
And I don't think it's fair to levy sexism as the only possible reason for the opinion. Gender-swapping a character does a lot more than change its societally implied competencies (which I am agreed is a thing it does not have to do at all, in fact). The goal of gender equality is a society where people of any gender can display their individual skills to their fullest potential without labouring under the gender-fuelled misapprehensions and presumptions of others; it is NOT to create a sexless society where genders are interchangeable and only determinable by reference to physiology. A female Doctor DOES create a different character and a different dynamic, it doesn't draw on the same archetypes that have fuelled the doctor over the show's history, and it sits poorly with much of what has made the show work over its long history.
Do feel free to point out to me non-continuity or fanfic stuff with a female Doctor that proves me wrong, though.
Oops, that above thing was me, by the way. Stupid OpenID.
A female Doctor DOES create a different character and a different dynamic
As does the shift from Hartnell to Troughton, or Eccleston to Tennant, etc.
I'm still not convinced it would be any different.
Oh yeah, and as I've noted previously - Doctor Who is a show about change. Why should so many elements be open to that, but not gender? Makes no sense.
Of course if they'd just bring back Romana and give the Doctor an intellectual equal again, all would be forgiven. : )
Is it just me or is the Dr getting thinner and thinner with each incarnation? Is he forced to leave behind some matter each time?
Timelords are actually highly evolved stick-insects. With each regeneration, they get closer to their stick-insect roots.
Well, this explains why I was hearing random references to "Matt Smith". I was wondering if there was any point in googling such an indistinct name to find out why people might be talking up the man - was he a dead mountaineer? a political exile revolutionary? a media personality from Malbonia who groped the to-be-princess Kate? But no, he's going to be a Doctor. I'm not sure if I'm delighted or disappointed by this.
If the Doctor is getting younger and younger, would that Lex a chance to be 13?
I guess it will be a case of seeing how he works out. I seem to remember (a few years back now) when Sylvester McCoy was cast, the only thing anyone seemed to know about him was that he used to put ferrets down his trousers...
This guy does look very young though...
I remembered him quite clearly from a show about inventions that was aimed at kids in the UK, with a fair amount of skit/historical type stuff. I remember liking it a lot.
Eureka. They showed it on the ABC.