XPost: rec.arts.drwho, uk.media.tv.sf.drwho, rec.arts.sf.tv 
 XPost: rec.arts.sf.fandom, rec.arts.tv 
 From: mike@xenocyte.com 
  
 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 the significance 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 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. 
  
 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. 
  
 > 
  
 [continued in next message] 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)