Title: The Case for Retconning Chris Chibnall and Jodie
Whittaker's Timeless Child from Doctor Who: Preserving the Essence
of the Series
Introduction:
Since its inception in 1963, Doctor Who has been a beloved science
fiction series cherished by fans worldwide. Throughout its many
iterations, the show has captivated audiences with its imaginative storytelling, compelling characters, and, perhaps most
importantly, its rich lore. However, in recent years, controversy
has surrounded the revelation of the Timeless Child, introduced
during Chris Chibnall's tenure as showrunner, and portrayed by
Jodie Whittaker as the Thirteenth Doctor. This article argues for
the retconning of the Timeless Child narrative, citing its
departure from established canon and its detrimental impact on the
essence of Doctor Who.
[SNIP]
Conclusion:
The Timeless Child storyline represents a departure from the core
principles and established canon of Doctor Who, alienating fans
and undermining the legacy of the series. By retconning this
controversial narrative, the show can reclaim its identity and
reaffirm its status as a beloved cultural institution. Doctor Who
is more than just a television show; it's a timeless journey
through time and space, and it's time to ensure that journey
remains true to its roots.
The Doctor wrote:
Title: The Case for Retconning Chris Chibnall and Jodie
Whittaker's Timeless Child from Doctor Who: Preserving the Essence
of the Series
Introduction:
Since its inception in 1963, Doctor Who has been a beloved science
fiction series cherished by fans worldwide. Throughout its many
iterations, the show has captivated audiences with its imaginative
storytelling, compelling characters, and, perhaps most
importantly, its rich lore. However, in recent years, controversy
has surrounded the revelation of the Timeless Child, introduced
during Chris Chibnall's tenure as showrunner, and portrayed by
Jodie Whittaker as the Thirteenth Doctor. This article argues for
the retconning of the Timeless Child narrative, citing its
departure from established canon and its detrimental impact on the
essence of Doctor Who.
[SNIP]
Conclusion:
The Timeless Child storyline represents a departure from the core
principles and established canon of Doctor Who, alienating fans
and undermining the legacy of the series. By retconning this
controversial narrative, the show can reclaim its identity and
reaffirm its status as a beloved cultural institution. Doctor Who
is more than just a television show; it's a timeless journey
through time and space, and it's time to ensure that journey
remains true to its roots.
Well done for posting some Doctor Who content Dave. <claps>
Chat GPT [or whoever] might well put forward a convincing case for
retconning the Timeless Child era of Doctor Who. However, regardless
of the argument(s) put forth, if the Executive Producers of Doctor
Who - and/or the BBC - don't want to retcon that part of the show,
then it's not going to happen. So what part of ...
"I’m not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall’s work on
‘The Timeless Children’. I’m not going to deny what he wrote. I’m >going with it. It’s absolutely fine. It’s canon, it happened. It was >transmitted. You cannot unwrite things, that would be absolutely
rude to a great colleague and a lovely friend.”
... do people not get?
It's in plain English. Spoken by RTD. The man who currently runs
Doctor Who. So anybody living in hope of retcon is obviously going
to be disappointed while RTD is in charge. Get over it.
Doctor Who has moved on. It's about time the people who couldn't
handle a female Doctor moved on too... at least until RTD casts
another one as Ncuti Gatwa's replacement in 2025!
In article <xn0oi5hfvjmaoiq004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
[SNIP]
Conclusion:
The Timeless Child storyline represents a departure from the
core principles and established canon of Doctor Who, alienating
fans and undermining the legacy of the series. By retconning
this controversial narrative, the show can reclaim its identity
and reaffirm its status as a beloved cultural institution.
Doctor Who is more than just a television show; it's a timeless
journey through time and space, and it's time to ensure that
journey remains true to its roots.
Well done for posting some Doctor Who content Dave. <claps>
Chat GPT [or whoever] might well put forward a convincing case
for retconning the Timeless Child era of Doctor Who. However,
regardless of the argument(s) put forth, if the Executive
Producers of Doctor Who - and/or the BBC - don't want to retcon
that part of the show, then it's not going to happen. So what
part of ...
"I'm not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall's
work on 'The Timeless Children'. I'm not going to deny
what he wrote. I'm going with it. It's absolutely fine.
It's canon, it happened. It was transmitted. You cannot
unwrite things, that would be absolutely rude to a great
colleague and a lovely friend."
... do people not get?
It's in plain English. Spoken by RTD. The man who currently runs
Doctor Who. So anybody living in hope of retcon is obviously
going to be disappointed while RTD is in charge. Get over it.
Doctor Who has moved on. It's about time the people who couldn't
handle a female Doctor moved on too... at least until RTD casts
another one as Ncuti Gatwa's replacement in 2025!
Get ready for more CHAT GPT headed your way!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0oi5hfvjmaoiq004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
[SNIP]
Conclusion:
The Timeless Child storyline represents a departure from the
core principles and established canon of Doctor Who, alienating
fans and undermining the legacy of the series. By retconning
this controversial narrative, the show can reclaim its identity
and reaffirm its status as a beloved cultural institution.
Doctor Who is more than just a television show; it's a timeless
journey through time and space, and it's time to ensure that
journey remains true to its roots.
Well done for posting some Doctor Who content Dave. <claps>
Chat GPT [or whoever] might well put forward a convincing case
for retconning the Timeless Child era of Doctor Who. However,
regardless of the argument(s) put forth, if the Executive
Producers of Doctor Who - and/or the BBC - don't want to retcon
that part of the show, then it's not going to happen. So what
part of ...
"I'm not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall's
work on 'The Timeless Children'. I'm not going to deny
what he wrote. I'm going with it. It's absolutely fine.
It's canon, it happened. It was transmitted. You cannot
unwrite things, that would be absolutely rude to a great
colleague and a lovely friend."
... do people not get?
It's in plain English. Spoken by RTD. The man who currently runs
Doctor Who. So anybody living in hope of retcon is obviously
going to be disappointed while RTD is in charge. Get over it.
Doctor Who has moved on. It's about time the people who couldn't
handle a female Doctor moved on too... at least until RTD casts
another one as Ncuti Gatwa's replacement in 2025!
Get ready for more CHAT GPT headed your way!
I'd rather you replied to the point...
Why are you still expecting a retcon when the show's Executive
Producer has said there won't be one?
Do you have reason to think that RTD is going to do the opposite of
what he has said so publicly?
Yellow Beard Yadallee lied again:
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore,
meticulously crafted over decades.
Liar! UNIT dating and Atlantis both disproved that!
Yellow Beard Yadallee lied again:
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore,
meticulously crafted over decades.
Liar! UNIT dating and Atlantis both disproved that!
In article <xn0oi6zwll735rp00d@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Get ready for more CHAT GPT headed your way!
I'd rather you replied to the point...
Why are you still expecting a retcon when the show's Executive
Producer has said there won't be one?
Do you have reason to think that RTD is going to do the opposite
of what he has said so publicly?
REcall when RTD said he did not want Gallifrey.
What happened in the end?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0oi6zwll735rp00d@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Get ready for more CHAT GPT headed your way!
I'd rather you replied to the point...
Why are you still expecting a retcon when the show's Executive
Producer has said there won't be one?
Do you have reason to think that RTD is going to do the opposite
of what he has said so publicly?
REcall when RTD said he did not want Gallifrey.
What happened in the end?
I'm well aware of PR spin and that Producers can change their minds
on ideas for a TV show. It's fiction, nothing is set in stone.
But why do you think RTD is telling porkies and that he will
actually unwrite his "friend's" work after saying that he won't? His
good friend who he gave the jobs of head writer and co-producer of >"Torchwood" to in 2005?
Your idea of loyalty and friendship must be different to mine. I
believe RTD on this one.
So carry on dreaming...
On 2024-02-17 3:55 p.m., solar penguin wrote:
Yellow Beard Yadallee lied again:
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore,
meticulously crafted over decades.
Liar! UNIT dating and Atlantis both disproved that!
You don't actually expect asswipe to understand or even read the
material he cut and pasted do you?
Besides he will just say, "That's AI for you".
Idlehands wrote on 18/2/24 11:14 am:
On 2024-02-17 3:55 p.m., solar penguin wrote:
Yellow Beard Yadallee lied again:
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore,
meticulously crafted over decades.
Liar! UNIT dating and Atlantis both disproved that!
You don't actually expect % to understand or even read the
material he cut and pasted do you?
Besides he will just say, "That's AI for you".
One has to wonder .... If "Yellow Beard Yadallee" doesn't think AI does
a good job (or even anything like a good job), WHY does he keep going
back to it??
Oh!! Of course! The All Important *Precious Post Count* !!
--
Daniel
This article argues for the retconning of
the Timeless Child narrative, citing its departure from established canon and its detrimental impact on the essence of Doctor Who.
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore, meticulously crafted over decades.
The revelation of the Timeless Child in the
Series 12 marked a significant departure from this established canon.
The
introduction of an unknown incarnation of the Doctor prior to the First Doctor
contradicts decades of storytelling and undermines the mystery surrounding the
character.
The Doctor's origin story, once shrouded in mystery and intrigue, is
now reduced to a mere footnote in a convoluted narrative.
Furthermore, the Timeless Child's revelation diminishes the significance of the
Doctor's choices and experiences throughout their many lives.
By implying that
the Doctor's abilities are innate rather than earned through centuries of learning and growth,
the Timeless Child narrative diminishes the agency and
heroism of the character. The Doctor's journey, once defined by their quest for
redemption and their commitment to justice, is overshadowed by a predetermined
destiny imposed upon them by outside forces.
Alienating the Fanbase:
Doctor Who boasts a dedicated fanbase that spans generations, united by their love for the series and its enduring legacy.
However, the Timeless Child
storyline has proven divisive among fans, with many expressing their dissatisfaction with the direction of the show under Chibnall's stewardship.
The decision to radically alter the Doctor's backstory without proper justification or regard for established canon has alienated long-time fans and eroded their trust in the creative team.
Moreover, the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the Thirteenth Doctor was initially met with excitement and anticipation, as she became the first woman to portray the iconic character. However, Whittaker's tenure has been marred by inconsistent writing and lackluster storytelling, exacerbated by the controversial Timeless Child arc. While Whittaker's performance has been widely praised, her tenure as the Doctor has been overshadowed by creative decisions that detract from the core principles of the series.
Preserving the Essence of Doctor Who:
At its core, Doctor Who is a show about hope, resilience, and the triumph of good over evil. Throughout its long history, the series has tackled complex themes and moral dilemmas, all while celebrating the boundless potential of the
human spirit.
Retconning the Timeless Child narrative is not about erasing the
past but rather reclaiming the essence of Doctor Who and restoring the sense of
wonder and mystery that defines the series.
By retconning the Timeless Child, Doctor Who can once again embrace its rich history while charting new and exciting adventures for the Doctor and their companions. The show can return to its roots as a beacon of optimism and imagination, inspiring viewers of all ages to believe in the power of kindness,
empathy, and the endless possibilities of the universe.
Conclusion:
Yads got ChatGPT to do his thinking for him again:
[SNIP opening comments that are pretty much inarguably true].
This article argues for the retconning of
the Timeless Child narrative, citing its departure from established canon and
its detrimental impact on the essence of Doctor Who.
OK - so what we are looking for from this article is
1) evidence that the Timeless Child narrative departs from “established >canon”
and
2) that any such departure, if present, has had a detrimental impact on the >“essence” of Doctor Who.
Doctor Who is renowned for its intricate and well-established lore,
meticulously crafted over decades.
Absolutely not the case.
Made up and retconned lore #1:
In the first episode of the show, Susan says that she invented the name >TARDIS and its expansion. But in Escape Switch (The Daleks Master Plan >episode 10) the Monk refers to his time ship as a TARDIS.
In the War Games, the War Chief calls his knockoff time machines “SIDRATs” >- clearly a play on TARDIS. And by the mid seventies the Time Lords all
refer to their own machines as TARDISes.
Made up and retconned lore #2:
In The Daleks, the Daleks are mutated descendants of the Dals. But in
Genesis of the Daleks, they become descendants of the Kaleds.
So elements of the very first two stories were retconned without reverence
to this “meticulously crafted lore”. It’s truer to say that the lore of >the show has always been mutable and that the writers have made it up as
they went along, rarely worrying whether it fitted in with past stories.
The examples are legion: Hartnell’s Doctor initially is a human from >another future world, with one heart, and a follower of a popular human >religion. The TARDIS is initially very vulnerable - the Sensorites are able >to completely remove its door lock. History is at first immutable - it
cannot be changed, not one jot! … The Time Lords can live forever barring >accidents - no, wait, after twelve regenerations, that is the end for a
Time Lord - no, wait, the Time Lords can grant a Time Lord a “new cycle” of
regenerations.
The whole idea of a meticulously crafted, rigid canon and lore is a myth, >wheeled out specifically to complain about some specific change or other.
The revelation of the Timeless Child in the
Series 12 marked a significant departure from this established canon.
The
introduction of an unknown incarnation of the Doctor prior to the First Doctor
contradicts decades of storytelling and undermines the mystery surrounding the
character.
There are two elements to this claim:
For the first one, like it or not, (and personally I don’t) the Timeless >Child narrative introduces a sinister agency capable of interfering with
the collective memory of the Time Lords - resulting in an almost
universally held BELIEF that the Hartnell incarnation is he first Doctor. >Therefore there is a change int he perception of decades of storytelling - >but no actual contradiction. In fact, the Timeless Child narrative is a
rare case of paying careful attention to the existing lore, and crafting >itself deliberately to FIT IN with all we have seen previously.
The second claim, that this undermines the mystery of the character, is >plainly untrue. The Doctor had been being “demystified” over decades - an >indifferent student at the Academy who had run off in a stolen TARDIS out
of boredom who then became a criminal for interfering with history and then >an agent of the Time Lords doing exactly the same thing, then destroying
both Time Lords and Daleks to end the Time War …damn little “mystery” left
about that.
The Doctor's origin story, once shrouded in mystery and intrigue, is
now reduced to a mere footnote in a convoluted narrative.
Agreed the new narrative is INSANELY convoluted, but now there are whole >vistas of NEW mysteries in the Doctor’s origins. Should anyone choose to >investigate them … but the ending of the Flux would seem to make that >unlikely. The Doctor has chosen not to open that particular mystery box
(fob watch).
Furthermore, the Timeless Child's revelation diminishes thesignificance of the
Doctor's choices and experiences throughout their many lives.
How? All those choices, all those experiences, are the same, and shaped the >Doctor of today exactly as they always had.
By implying that
the Doctor's abilities are innate rather than earned through centuries of
learning and growth,
What “abilities”? There is just one effective difference - the Doctor has >always been able to regenerate, and has no known innate limit to those >regenerations : rather than being granted cycles of 12 at a time by the
Time Lords. The Doctor has gained no other new abilities, and all the >abilities they do have were earned the same way they always were. This
claim is false.
the Timeless Child narrative diminishes the agency andquest for
heroism of the character. The Doctor's journey, once defined by their
redemption and their commitment to justice, is overshadowed by a predetermined
destiny imposed upon them by outside forces.
No, because there is no forward destiny - the change is that the Doctor is >now not just a Time Lord, but is the ancestor of all Time Lords. Which >changes what, exactly? If the argument was that this change is unnecessary >and adds little to the lore - I agree. But it changes the Doctor’s own >motivations and beliefs not one iota.
These arguments form a straw man with no basis in actual events in the
show.
Alienating the Fanbase:
Doctor Who boasts a dedicated fanbase that spans generations, united by their
love for the series and its enduring legacy.
Fair enough.
However, the Timeless Child
storyline has proven divisive among fans, with many expressing their
dissatisfaction with the direction of the show under Chibnall's stewardship.
So? There was plenty of dissatisfaction in the eighties. And with RTD’s >“Last of the Time Lords” change to the lore. And with the idea that Time >Lords could change gender and racial phenotype on regeneration. This is not >the first, and won’t be the last, new creative choice that divides the fan >base.
The decision to radically alter the Doctor's backstory without proper
justification or regard for established canon has alienated long-time fans >> and eroded their trust in the creative team.
“We , a specific small group of fans, don’t like this change so it must be >retconned!” That’s all this argument boils down to, in the end.
Moreover, the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the Thirteenth Doctor was
initially met with excitement and anticipation, as she became the first woman
to portray the iconic character. However, Whittaker's tenure has been marred >> by inconsistent writing and lackluster storytelling, exacerbated by the
controversial Timeless Child arc. While Whittaker's performance has been
widely praised, her tenure as the Doctor has been overshadowed by creative >> decisions that detract from the core principles of the series.
All true. Very few people are claiming that the Chibnall era was the
greatest in the show’s history.
Still, even as McCoy’s dire tenure does, it has its adherents.
potential of the
Preserving the Essence of Doctor Who:
At its core, Doctor Who is a show about hope, resilience, and the triumph of >> good over evil. Throughout its long history, the series has tackled complex >> themes and moral dilemmas, all while celebrating the boundless
human spirit.
None of which are changed by the Timeless Child, regrettable as it might
be.
Retconning the Timeless Child narrative is not about erasing the
past but rather reclaiming the essence of Doctor Who and restoring the >sense of
wonder and mystery that defines the series.
Total bollocks. “Retconning the Timeless Child” is the sulky demand of some
sad people who can’t accept that the show is just a show and it can move on >and survive even the silliest of stories and changes.
Time and the Rani. What an unmitigated pile of s*t. But it is still part
of the show.
By retconning the Timeless Child, Doctor Who can once again embrace its rich >> history while charting new and exciting adventures for the Doctor and their >> companions. The show can return to its roots as a beacon of optimism and
imagination, inspiring viewers of all ages to believe in the power of >kindness,
empathy, and the endless possibilities of the universe.
It can continue to do all those good things WITHOUT wasting time and energy >in a retcon. I want to see new stories, not another Gordian knot of >retroactive alterations to continuity to salve the egos of a few desperate >malcontents.
Conclusion:
Some people sulk. Get over it. By moving on and letting the Timeless Child >narrative drift unremarked into the past, we can all enjoy the future of
the show with just one pointless question and problem permanently removed:
no longer do we need to count regenerations and wonder what loophole or new >change to lore will be needed to allow the Doctor to continue past a
certain number of “lives”.
The show is timeless. So is the Doctor. Worlds without end.
--
“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor
In article <uqslfj$10aog$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Idlehands wrote on 18/2/24 11:14 am:
Besides he will just say, "That's AI for you".
Lting Idlehands lies again!
One has to wonder .... If "Yellow Beard Yadallee" doesn't think AI
does a good job (or even anything like a good job), WHY does he
keep going back to it??
Oh!! Of course! The All Important *Precious Post Count* !!
That is what you think!
Yet in North America in the 1908s DW was gaining a fanbase.
The Doctor wrote on 18/2/24 11:53 pm:
In article <uqslfj$10aog$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel65
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Idlehands wrote on 18/2/24 11:14 am:
<Snip>
Besides he will just say, "That's AI for you".
Lting Idlehands lies again!
"Lting"??
One has to wonder .... If "Yellow Beard Yadallee" doesn't think AI
does a good job (or even anything like a good job), WHY does he
keep going back to it??
Oh!! Of course! The All Important *Precious Post Count* !!
That is what you think!
YEAP!!
--
Daniel
The Doctor wrote on 19/2/24 7:29 am:
<Snip>
Yet in North America in the 1908s DW was gaining a fanbase.
REALLY?? I wouldn't have thought T.V. existed in North America in
1908's, "Yellow Beard Yadallee"!!
--
Daniel
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 307 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 39:07:02 |
| Calls: | 6,910 |
| Files: | 12,376 |
| Messages: | 5,428,928 |