XPost: rec.arts.drwho
From: andyl@azaal.plus.com
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:47:33 +0100,
John Russell wrote:
>
> I was just recalling that years ago most programs didn't give their main
> charecters "family". All those police dramas where all you saw was them
> solving crimes at "work" as if home didn't exist. But in the last 20 years
> we've seen a subtle change, with the use of the "home" to give the
> charecters more depth. Taggert (original with his disabled wife Jean),
> Wexford, Midsomer Murders are examples of this.
>
> RTD has just applied this idea to Dr Who. Rose has become the most complete
> of the Dr's companions becuase we have seen her existence outside of being
> the companion. We have been asked to understand the emotional aspects of
> being the companion, leaving home, friends family, and of those left
> behind.
This is all true to some extent, but away from the immediate confines of
home (apart from the first trip away and Father's Day) she has shown little
or no emotional attachment to those left behind. We only see that when she
returns, otherwise she is just the same fun-loving, adventuresome companion
as we have seen before. Indeed by the time we get to tPotW she coldly
announces that she no longer has the emotional ties to her to her home-life.
There is also the extent to how much of this should be explicit and how
much should be implicit. Also how much should be direct interaction between
Rose and Mickey+Jackie and how much should be mirrored through Rose's
relationships with the people she meets in other places/times.
I think that one can justifiably complain that RTD has been fairly
heavy handed in a lot of his writing this series and not just with the
kitchen sink stuff, but also some of the moral/political points he has
introduced in some of his stories.
--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|