XPost: rec.arts.drwho 
 From: greenyammo@blueyonder.co.uk 
  
 John Russell wrote: 
  
 > "Frankymole"  wrote in message 
 > news:d976uq$7tj$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk... 
 > 
 >>>"greenyammo"  wrote in message 
 >>>news:csxte.15850$Vo6.13634@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... 
 >>> 
 >>>>Doesn't have to be mindless does it though does it? Is anybody out 
 >>>>there actually interested in Mickey and Rose's mum? Is that why we 
 >>>>tune in every week? Eastenders does this sort of thing on a far 
 >>>>superior level. 
 >> 
 >>I care about Mickey and Rose's mum because of the way they influence (and 
 >>are influenced by) Rose's growth. 
 >> 
 >>It's more of a conventional family than the "UNIT Family" of the 1970s but 
 >>performs the same function for viewers.  Only this time, to coin my mum's 
 >>phrase, "without all those boring soldiers". 
 >>-- 
 >>Frankymole 
 >> 
 > 
 > 
 > 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. 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 But are we going to have to keep seeing this with every assistant and 
 with every episode? 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)