The rec.arts.drwho Quote File - Apr./May 98

Courtesy of Robert J. Smith

Submissions and comments should be sent to Robert Smith)

Welcome everyone to the latest Quote File. The Quote File is basically the
"best and brightest" of rec.arts.drwho - that is, the funniest quotes to
appear in the newsgroup as nominated by *you*. To that end, if you see a
quote you think derserves an entry in the Quote File, just mail me at

or the handy-dandy

and include the attributions and the quote in full.

Since this newsgroup is more than full of it's fair share of 
off-topic/pointless stuff, I'd like to request that you *don't* waste 
bandwidth by shouting "Quote File!" in the newsgroup - email it to me 
instead! Please don't be shy about this - even if you only think it's
mildly funny, I'd *much* rather have too many to choose from than too few.

Also, please note that all dates are approximations only (ie when they got
emailed to me, rather than when they got posted).

Disclaimer: The copyright of all material contained herein remains with
the original poster. No attempt is made to supercede any copyright and the
Quote File maintains its impartiality under Fair Use for purposes of
Comment or Review.

The quotefile is updated monthly (usually midmonth, although it varies
depending on my schedule) and past and present quotefiles can be found at:

On with the quotes! 


[Subject: Re: Bollocks on Gallifrey]

Haven't you been paying attention to any of the
Loom threads? Time Lords no longer have the
Testicles of Rassilon. They are completely smooth
below the waist, which is why the Doctor could
only snog Grace in the movie. He's half-human
on his mother's side, but it's the TOP half.
And it also proves that the Tom Baker doll was
the only anatomically correct DW toy ever

Peter Anghelides (> 13/4/98


Jim Smith (> writes:

> the WHO stories INVASION OF THE DINO's

Ah, the famous 'DW/Flinstones' crossover, sadly lost us when
Hanna-Barbera torched a load of old programs that they didn't think
anyone wanted to watch. 

The similarities of format (quarries; attractive, occassionally dizty
but usually reliable females in short skirts and high-heels; and
pig-headed and gruff men) it was the perfect partnership - even if
Colin Baker and Fred Flinstone screen-stole incorigably from each
other throughout. The cloning machines were poorly realised, but that
was no doubt the budgetary restraints of the time. The shocking scene
where Barney was revealed as the Master is what makes it truly
memorable for me - who could have guessed that it was Ainley under
there all the time.

Eng6gcgs 15/4/98

==================================================================== (Brett O'Callaghan) wrote:
>>That just makes it worse - first version was bad writing caused by
>>deadlines/lack of imagination etc.  Second version was just fanwank.

Eng6gcsc (> wrote:
>Hardly. It was an attempt (a successful one, BTW), to show the lengths 
>to which the Doctor is willinging to go to, to highlight the fact that each 
>incarnation of the Doctor is strikingly different and its more than just 
>the clothes, and to flesh-out the idea that the Doctor's previous 
>incarnations are likely to hate the manipulative bastard he became 
>during his seventh life.


Ladies and Gentlemen - presents for your enjoyment
the definitive definition of "fanwank"!

Gaze in awe at the effortless formulation of the faultless definition
that has eluded fandom since the day that Jimmy Bloggs wrote the first
Doctor Who fanfic back in 1963 - "Doctor Who and the nasty, dirty,
smelly cavemen, again."

Brett O'Callahan (> 16/4/98


Reuben wrote:

> how you could look
> at Hurndall in Blake's 7 (a half naked old man) and think of Hartnel is
> beyond me.

You obviously have *no* idea how JNTs mind works.
Jim Smith (> 16/4/98


[Subject: Re: Trads, rads, frocks, guns, camps, etc.]

>>How about "mad, bad, and dangerous to know?"

Dangermouse wrote:
>That'd be me...

Shurely "Trad, Bad, and Dangermouse to go"? Sort-of a precis of BBC books...

Rob Stradling (> 16/4/98


Eng6gcsc (> wrote:
>>Only 'Ghotslight'? *Only* 'Ghostlight'!!! Its more than worth 
>>re-painting every frame 1000 times.

Steve Roberts (> wrote:
>Oh come off it - if ever there was an example of pretentious fanwank,
>that story is it.

And what's wrong with fans wanking, pray?  I begin to suspect you
of _not being altogether a fan_ of the final season.  Nurse!
The still-frame machine, please, and the 9-gauge episode guide.
Thanks. So, Mr Roberts, I'm just going to make a couple of tests.
Does it hurt when I say

    "The Curse of Fenric was an enthralling masterpiece"

...yes, yes, I know old man, but if you could just keep still...
And put your head back, please.  Anywhere on the neck will do.
Good.  Now, you may feel just a little discomfort here...

    "Survival was a tight, eloquent plot, making superb use
     of video effects"

I'm afraid there's no doubt, Mr Roberts.  You seem to be suffering
from an aggravated case of Sylvestrus unconvincedus, a complaint
which as you know television professionals are especially subject
to.  Here, I'll give you a prescription.  Watch "Remembrance of the
Daleks" every six hours, then come back and see me next week
and we'll take it from there.

Next patient please!  Ah, Mr Long, do come in.  I understand you've
been suffering from Delirium pertweebilis... have you been playing
the soundtrack album of "The Sea Devils" as I asked, then?

Graham Nelson (> 17/4/98


John Long wrote:
>I'm finally getting tired of fighting about The Mutants, especially 
>with someone who loves The Chase so much.  You know, the one with no story 
>and no plot.

The Chase does so have a plot and story.  In fact, the plot and story were
so good they used it as the title of the thing.

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> 17/4/98


Terry Burnett (> wrote:
>I used to think Dr Who fans got together on this newsgroup.

Well, we certainly tricked you there, didn't we.

Ben Verkentine (> 17/4/98


The Becker (> wrote:
>>>I think for the most part it is because of both your bias and the
>>>misconceptions about the book that you revealed above ...

Dave Stone wrote:
>> So, Dave, read any good books lately?

David Versace wrote:
>Nah. He's only got the one.

That was really uncalled for. This is just typical of the kind of 
stuff that I have had to put up with every time I post here, no matter 
how long I am away from this newsgroup. The way that some of you 
people talk about me, one might think that I had 'The Pit' tatooed on 
my forehead or something. Obviously, I do not. I know that you may 
think that it is funny to make jokes about it, especially after all of 
the flame-bait I was stupid enough to respond to a couple of years 
ago, but enough is enough. Just because I do not agree with your 
opinion about a book, it does not mean that I am illiterate, as one 
author explicitly told me. I am a person, too, and I am really not 
that much different from the rest of you. I wake up every morning. I 
get dressed. I shave. I take a shower. I brush my teeth. I read the 
morning news paper. I sit down to eat breakfast, as The Pit pops out 
of my toaster. After that, I go outside and walk my dog, The Pit, and 
chat with my neighbours about The Pit. After meditating on The Pit, I 
get into my car, The Pitmobile, and drive to work, down at The Pit. 
After a long day's work, I have dinner at The Pizza Pit. Then I go to 
church, where I and others read and sing passages from The Pit. Then 
we all go to the airport and hand out free literature about The Pit.  
I like to wind down in the evening by kicking off my shoes and 
relaxing by listening to some music, which is, usually, of course... 
Paula Cole. I can sleep well at night, knowing that The Pit is hanging 
over all of my doors and windows to ward off evil spirits. And, just 
in case any humans try to break into my house at night, I always keep 
a copy of The Pit under my pillow.

You see; I am just an ordinary guy.

Dave Becker (> 18/4/98


Terry wrote:
>Hi there guys, I am in the process of building a full size set of
>Panoptican featured in "Deadly Assasin."  Is there any plans in DWM
>or the DW Technical Manual that I can use? 

Small-time stuff! I did it ages ago, but I couldn't manage to find a
remote stellar manipulator in order to create the power source I need
for my full-size Gallifrey and transduction barriers. (You can find
the schematics for the constellation of Kasterborus in the DW

By the way, I'm halfway through making a full size copy of the
alternative universe depicted in Inferno. Does anyone know if the BBC
ever released the plans for publication?

Slake (> 18/4/98


[Subject:  Re: Hartnell's fluffs?]

Marty wrote:
> More to the point why did they bother to say anything about it in
> the first place WE are watching in B/W how would we know if it was
> in colour or not?!!! 

Out-take from "Slipback".

"What's that huge ugly monster slavering its way down
 the corridor towards us, Doctor?"

"Oh ignore it, no-one else can see it - we're on the
 radio, you stupid girl."

"OK Doctor." (crunching and munching sounds> "Doctor? Doctor??"

Peter Anghelides (> 19/4/98


Chris Rednour wrote:
>>You know you've been in the newsgroup for too long when you read HP
>>automatically as "Happiness Patrol"...

Reuben (> wrote 
>Boy wouldn't that be a hoot, Happiness Patrol Printers.  Any time you 
>get a printer error message your encouraged to remain happy.

Happiness is mandatory.

The Computer is your friend, trust the Computer...

This post is cleared for citizens of Ultraviolet clearance only. If your
security clearance is bloew Ultraviolet, then report for termination

Have a nice day. 

Dangermouse (> 20/4/98


LadyMegsie (> wrote:
>> i agree. in fact i cant think of a sillier idea for a bad guy.
>> fancy the Doctor having a bad repressed side.

Charles Daniels (> wrote:
> Yeah well I always pegged the Doctor as having a
> bad repressed side..  I mean, he's English!

I fear I must disagree with you there, Charles.  The English are

you dont know wha  you TAKING about you FOOL IMBEECIL STUPDI

often grossly stereotyped as being repressed and inhibited, whereas

ENGLISH r amazingley  wondeflu no bad represed AT AL  look at

in fact it is merely the unaccustomed novelty of meeting politeness

me  normla and briliant NOT A  BAD REPRESED SIDE at AL i let it

that makes all those bally foreigners see us that way.  As an example

evereyon see miy true WONDRFULNES so there  BOW DOWN

of exceptionally rude countries, I could refrain from mentioning France

WORSHOP me i am GOD!!!!!!  am a th MASTER OF TH UNIVERS

but on second thoughts they deserve it.

wil DETROY YOU AL!!!!! just WATE AND SEE you rdoomd!!!!! DOOMD!!!

No, you have been hallucinating.

TEL YOU AL DOOMD!!!!!!!!!!!! I   WIL KIL YOU AL WORMS!!!!!!!!

The English don't have a "bad repressed side" at all.

Finn Clark (> 21/4/98


[Subject: Re: Dr. Who Toys]

Auntie Vanessa Doll $12.95 (rabbits not included)
Tegan               $6.95 (going cheap because the walk's not quite right)
Action man tank     $39.95 (guaranteed to menace giant robots)
Tickle Me Zygon     $7.50 (don't underestimate the power of fluffy
Blow Up Adric       $11.35 ("a dream come true" raves Peter Davison in his
	 review for Veterinarians Monthly)
Pantomine Myrka     $24.95 (bouncing door not included)
Beard of Evil       $8.25  (or cheaper if Anthony Ainley is inside it at
	 time of purchase)
The Game of Rassilon $17.55 (Second hand. Includes realistic looking
	 (though slightly aged) plastic figures of three Doctors and a
	 replacement for the first. Fourth Doctor not included)
Little Hodcombe War Re-enactment Set (Junior Version) $33.40 (junior
	 version guaranteed not to frighten youngsters with mature themes.
	 Adult version also available, but this one includes Malus)
Bi-Al Corporation Comedy Eyewear $9.95 (comes complete with comedy
	 eyebrows and instructions on how to simulate unconvincing
	 European accent. Our suppliers are yet to construct the
	 oh-so-natural-looking eyewear goggles (demand is Lowe), but
	 contacts have been made)
Matching Perpigilliam Brown and Vislor Turlough Swimming Costumes $3.35
	 (cheap because very little material required. Only available from
	 our adult role playing sex outlet)
Celestial Toyroom Commemorative Trilogic game $13.20 (specially made to be
	 played one-handed)
"Crashing" Concorde Play Set $8.30 (Complete with simulated Prehistoric
	 wasteland. Manufacturer guarantees that Time Flies when playing)
Mini TARDIS (with Logopolitan background) $10.95 (Thanks to block
	 transfer computation, we can now offer this item at reduced size
	 and reduced price. At last, we've cut it down to size!)

Robert Smith? (> 21/4/98


[Subject: Re: Hartnell's fluffs?]

Simon S ( wrote:
>>>Here's a question that's been bothering me for a while. In the opening
>>>moments of episode one of The Keys of Marinus, the Doctor tells Barbara
>>>that he does have a colour television. When Barbara asks where it is,
>>>the Doctor replies, "Well, at the moment, it's, er, temporarily fault a

Dominic Jackson wrote:
>>I think the line is actually "Hors de compan" (sp??!!) - presumably some
>>French phrase meaning out of order.   Tech yourself French with the new
>>BBC educational drama series ;-)

David M (> wrote:
>"Hors de combat" IIRC

Didn't Hartnell face one of these in The Myth Makers?

Peter Anghelides (> 21/4/98


[Subject:  Re: Thought for the day]

I wish I had more Troughton to look at (begin 'Lament for Power and
Evil', a totally crap ballad in 450 stanzas that I just made up) 
because I really think that I could like him more, if most of his
stories were just a little less a) dull, b) cheap and c) destroyed. 

David Versace (> 22/4/98


>>This would mean the Doctor carting around a dead surgeon. Boy,
>>and I thought that Adric was a stiff performance.

Mike Teague wrote:
> Yes, but he went to pieces in the end.
And now he can only get bit parts.

Peter Anghelides (> 23/4/98


[Subject:  Re: If]

Brian Glen Palicia wrote:
> the TARDIS could talk, what would it say?

Doctor: "What's this string? I've never seen that before!"
(fx: pulls string>
TARDIS: "Hi, I'm talky TARDIS! Use my 'phone! Hi, I'm talky TARDIS!
Use my..." 
Doctor: "I see the BBC Worldwide Marketing Division have finally run
out of merchandise ideas, then..." 

Steve Biggs (> 23/4/98


[Subject: Re: "If..." (Was: Re: If)]

If you can keep your head when all about you
  Are Morbius's pile of limbs and glue,
If you can trust the Thals when Ian doubts you
  But make allowance for the Daleks too;
If you can dream -- and yet out-dream the Master,
  If you play some boring retconned game
With Fenric, meet with Triumph and Disaster
  But treat those two cliff-hangars just the same;
If you can wear a scarf and keep your hat on,
  Offer jelly-babes to Kings -- nor lose the common touch,
If only Adric of your friends gets spat on,
  If Time Lords count on you -- and far too much;
If you can pad out underactive minutes
  In corridors of cooking-foil, and run;
Then kissing Grace is not a sin, it's
  Merely proof that you're half-Man, my son!

    -- Valeyard Kipling
       (author of "The Gods of the Ragnarok Headings", &c.)
Graham Nelson (> 23/4/98


[Subject:  Re: most under-rated Valeyard]

My thoughts on the Valeyard:

The First Valeyard was ok but somewhat dull. His companions made his
stories shine. Still, he WAS the Valeyard, and he could occasionally
make that Valeyard magic work. 

The Second Valeyard was much more enjoyable, able to play a range from
gurgling idiot to utter genius. Sadly, his network ITV decided to burn
most of the episodes of his era because an inspection found that there
were no violations in building codes in their warehouse and in fact
there was plenty of room. 

The Third Valeyard, trapped on Ravalox as The Tribe Of The Free's
scientific advisor, keeps himself busy as best he can. Watch for
action sequences as The Valeyard's donkey chases his opponent's
thouroughbred horse. 

The Fourth Valeyard travels through time and space again. His
trademark is the classic "Care for a piece of black licorice?" The
Valeyard was going to poison the licorice candy, but since it killed
most of his opponents anyway, there was no reason to bother. 

The Fifth Valeyard is somewhat younger and unsure of himself. An avid
fan of curling, even to wearing a curling uniform as his outfit, this
Valeyard tried to enjoy the carnage, but kept on getting hurt by it.
His companion - Dicar - blew up on a Dalek transport that he was
supposed to be capturing for the Valeyard. Another companion -
Turncoat - was unmasked as a GOOD guy, though thankfully he returns to
the dark side after a while. He died from poisoning because Repi, his
newest companion, mistook bat "orange juice" for "bat milk". 

The Sixth Valeyard took the show in a radical direction by having
really restrained emotions. Actually, he was bashed for having no
emotions at all! He tried to at least move an eyebrow in the epic
cross-over story "Trial Of A Time Lord", which was going to be
simulcast on both the BBC and ITV if ITV hadn't lost its prints and
the BBC refused to supply new ones. The Sixth Valeyard was
unceremoniously fired. 

The Seventh Valeyard rolled his t's and took the show in a new
direction.  Occasionally he showed hints of honesty. Lady Portefein
tried to reveal the Valeyard's good side, but no one would listen. The
audience noticed, the ratings slipped, and "The Valeyard" was placed
on hiatus. 

The Further Valeyard Adventures sent the Valeyard to new depths of
soul searching. Among its more controversial moments: the novel where
he doesn't curse or kill anyone, the one where he actually saves the
universe from Blake, the one where he keeps the alternate universe
from collapsing. The strain from all of these out of character actions
will cause the Valeyard misery and eventually result in a heart
attack. By the end of the series, the Valeyard recovers his old
wickedness and has a new purpose. 

The Eighth Valeyard falls in love a lot, but still manages to wreak
havoc with a vengeance. Watch the scene where he holds himself hostage
with the policeman's gun, then shoots a chicken for no apparent

Of them all, I think The Sixth Valeyard is the most under-rated. We
must remember that Michael Jayston did not have creative control over
his character.  He did the best he could. By the time he was done, you
really hated that block of wood. 

Benjamin F. Elliott (> 24/4/98 


Reuben (> wrote: 
>I'm stuck at work for a while tonight, and don't have access to my
>tapes.  Anyway I just needed a quick quote for one of my projects. 
>Does anyone remember the exact quote from The Five Doctors where
>Thoughton's Doctor describes the Death Zone? 

"Why, yes, Brigadier, it's a lovely place.  Me and the other time
lords used to hang out there in our college days.  We smoked dope,
protested about the V'yet/N'am war, that sort of thing.  Then Drax had
this bad trip, and like, all the mushrooms started dancing, and it was
really weird and stuff.  All the colours exploded sideways in lots of
little colours and it was scary.  Never found out why we called it the
Death Zone." 

At least I *think* that's it.  My memory's not what it used to be. 

Alan Taylor (> 24/4/98


[Subject: Worst Cliff-hangers]

The very worst cliff-hangers in Who's history, IMHO.

1. The Daleks attempt to fire at the Doctor and Sarah, but their guns don't
work.(WILL our heroes the Daleks repair their guns in time to destroy the 
evil Doctor? Find out next week!) Death to the Daleks # 1

2. The Doctor jumps off a cliff. (Oh gee, the ledge ended .... I'll go down!
Ahhhhhrg!)  Dragonfire #2

3. Stephen wants to open the door but the Doctor stops him. "If either of 
you had gone out there it would have been very dangerous! The Atmosphere 
out there is poisonous!" (EEEEK! The Doctor might dose off and fall onto 
the door control!) The Dalek Masterplan #6

4. The Doctor and Bell-Aal see a red design on the floor. (WILL our 
heroes the Doctor and Bell-All fall victim to the inmamous Exillon art? 
Is it WET PAINT? Find out Next week!) Death to the Daleks #3

5. In the 3rd cliffhanger in the story to feature this event, the a dinosaur
appears before the Doctor. (Oh dear, this is getting monotonous! Wait! 
Can I get by a THIRD time?) Invasion of the Dinosaurs #5

(> 25/4/98


[Subject: Re: DWM: Perfect Day]

Steve Roberts (> wrote:
>the gratuitous shot of Peri's tits and replaced them
>with... Pertwee.

So you only got one tit then.

Marcus Durham (> 26/4/98


[Subject: Re: Worst Cliff-hangers]

The Ice Warriors Part 4, I has the Doctor in a reception 
area of the Ice Warriors ship and he is being eccentric and difficult 
and thus  won't tell them his name until he can see them or something 
like the cliffhanger has the Warriors telling  him if he 
doesn't tell them his name they will kill him....gee I wonder how he is 
gonna get out of that one?

Achtung74 (> 27/4/98


 [Subject:  Re: Lost episodes]

Forwarded from rec.arts.clangers:

There was much excitement today when it was revealed that vital
footage from the hitherto lost Clangers episode "Soup Dragon Cutaway"
has been recovered from an episode of the now forgotten children's tea
time serial Dr Who and the Hand of the Sea Devil Monsters. 

Until now fans had thought the best chance of finding missing stories
was from those sold overseas in the early 50's, but extensive searches
of archives in Papua New Guinea, Reykjavik and Milton Keynes had
turned up nothing.

Audio versions of some stories have of course been available on tape
for ages, but despite Oliver "Ivor" Postgate's stalwart narration we
are sure that completists will rush out and buy the new video on which
the extra footage is available for the first time; complete with
exclusive interviews with Big Clanger, Baby Clanger and the lady who
knitted the sets. 

Message ends......

M J Lawson (> 27/4/98


[Subject:  Re: Rewriting the TVM: A hypothetical.]

Marcus Durham (> wrote: 

> Dead is dead. Doctor Who usually goes to pains to explain this,


Upon my soul.

I find that hard to belive of a series that kept killing off the
Ainely Master then bringing him back without a word of explaination,
that kills of Davros then brings him back with some crap words of
explaination, that kills of its lead charcter every couple of years,
that carps on about "The final end" of the Daleks, that has a place
kept in the APC for dead Time Lords, that does stories like "The
Ghosts of N-Space", that has Chronotis' ressurection in "Shada", that
has dozens of undead characters from Aukon to Rassilon, that shows
that from the right perspective we're all dead (just as from the right
perspective we've all not been born yet), and a series in which the
whole universe is being prolonged beyond the point of its natural
death, in which an allegedly classic villain is a brain in a jar, and
in which the line between life and death is generally about as blurry
as looking at a ghostly smudge through the wrong size of spectacles. 

Amid all this, I must have missed the bits where the series went to
pains to explain that dead was dead. Unless of course you're just
talking about Adric.

Richard Jones (> 27/4/98


Paul Andinach wrote:
>>>>>*you* use it for is to kill!"), and the Master responds by dropping
>>>>>the last traces of Masterliness and coming up with comments like
>>>>>"Life is wasted on the living".

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> wrote:
>>>>Well, I can see that, but I also think that it *could* be a Masterly 

Sam Nelson wrote in message ...
>>>It's a "Hitchhikers Guide" reference.  (Zaphod's great-grandfather said
>>>it in the seance scene).

>>>We know from "Frontier" the Master can enjoy reading British SF novels.
>>>And we know from "Ghostlight" that the "Hitchhikers" books might exist
>>>in the Whoniverse.

>>>Why shouldn't the Master have read them?  Why shouldn't he quote 
>>>from one of them?  It's in character for him.

Magrat wrote:
>>Hold on, the Doctor was reading Oolon Calupid's 'Origins of the Universe' 
>>in Destiny otD which suggests the Whoniverse and the Hitch-hiker's 
>>Galaxy are the same thing. The Ghost Light reference could come from a 
>>genuine HHGTG (as opposed to Adams' novels) as it is the Book that says 
>>mankind "never invites his ancestors to dinner". However, Zaphod 
>>Beedlebrox III's remark was not part of the Book itself but was only in 
>>the radio, if the Whoniverse and the Hitch-Hiker's Galaxy are 
>>the same, as lots of things suggest, how can the Master know what ZBIII's 
>>remark was? Er, does that question make sense?

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> wrote:
>The easy answer was that if DW and HHGTG are the same universe, then
>the Master was probably there when ZBIII made the statement [and
>probably the Doctor was there as well, since the Master would want the
>Doctor to recognize the quote].

>Now *why*, exactly, the Master decides to use that particular quote is
>unknown, at this time. 

And it has been long and widely speculated that if we knew just WHY
the Master said that to the Doctor just seconds before his untimely
death we'd know a lot more about the universe than we do now.

Charles Daniels (> 27/4/98


[Subject: Re: Sontarans]

Dangermouse wrote:
>The ones in Shakedown are actually very good, though the acting leaves
>something to be desired.... 

I don't know, I think the one Sontaran (the one who isn't the leader) gives
a great performance.  If it wasn't for his acting I would have had no idea
that the Sontaran was hopped out of his mind on some form of Sontaran
drugs, the script just didn't reference that properly.

David Miller (> 28/4/98


Arcanity (> wrote:
>>Speaking of Dalek plan accuracy, The Doctor Who Technical Manual has
>>pretty awful Daleks, too.

Paul Andinach (>
>The Doctor Who Technical Manual is just a picture book with a gimmick.
>Apart from the TARDIS, you're not *supposed* to use any of the
>diagrams for building things.

        Well, *I* used it to build a Jagaroth Spaceship and
a Movellan sidearm.  However, as Gene points out about, the
results are "awful".  My Jagaroth ship splintered into twelve pieces
and the pilot action figure disappeared.  The Movellan sidearm
just buzzed a lot but didn't do anything (although Tom Baker
did keel over unconscious, which he'd have done anyway).

Jason A. Miller 28/4/98


[Subject: Re: BBC Dalek novels]

Tlotoxl (> wrote:
>>170 pages into War, sofar very good if a bit basic, not as complex as
>>the adverage NA

Henry Potts (> wrote:
>I think the beginning is the best bit, before it gets bogged down in 
>speeches instead of dialogue and in inconsistent and unnecessarily 
>convoluted plotting. Tell us what you thought of it when you finish.

One of the big minus points of the story for me was Sam slobbering of the 
Doctor every 5 minutes along with the dalek talking to Davros and 
effectivlely saying "the boys have had a chat and we think you should be 
the Guv, so if you want any help just give us a nod"  gives me the 
impression of a group of Daleks knocking off work, going to the pub and 
chatting about haw crap the Dalek Prime (Minister) is.

Tlotoxl (> 30/4/98


Jean-Marc Lofficier" (> wrote:
>But it dos inform the TVM after ll.  Meaning tha you can ither believe that
>the Doc is the fruit of the union of a Time Lord & an Earthwoman (details
>to be filled in someday), or the Loom.  I believe the former.  (But don't
>mind if some folks refer the latter.)

So, the Doctor is perhaps the Fruit of the Loom?

Robert G. Cole (> 30/4/98


Cliff Bowman wrote:
[Subject: Gordon Tipple FAQ (1 of 1)]

This is a list of Frequently Asked Questions about Gordon Tipple. It
will be posted to this newsgroup appoximately never. 

This document is split into 1 section.


1: Gordon Tipple
	1.1 Who the fuck is Gordon tipple?

1. Gordon Tipple.
1.1 Who the fuck is Gordon Tipple? 
 - he's the guy who played the Master at the start of the TVM.

Conrad Feinson (> 1/5/98


>>As I understand it, vegetarians don't eat meat or the produce
>>therefrom, whereas vegans really REALLY don't eat meat or the produce

John Long wrote:
>Vegans say no to dairy products *and* vegetables.  They're awfully
>annoying if you want to hear the truth.

and vegatables? This is obviously some new definition of veganism which 
has never be used by anyone else before, ever.

Magrat (> 2/5/98


Jonathan Blum writes:
>Incidentally, when you spend so much time in your threads waving
>your theory about, and acting like your theory is bigger and more
>solid than everyone else's... according to that same Freudian dynamic,
>you're acting archetypally male.  Constructing a coherent argument
>doesn't actually make a difference; what matters is displays of
>dominance.  So when you start pointing at other peoples' theories
>and laughing, clearly that's just another attempt to elevate your rank
>in the herd and improve your mating possibilities...

DR. FREUD - Ah yes, so.  A very interesting case...  very interesting indeed. 
Further therapy strongly suggested.  (makes notes>  Look at zis card.  What
does it remind you of?

J.B. - A butterfly.

DR. FREUD - A butterfly, I see...  Not a huge erect penis, symbolising your
Oedipal complex with childhood tendencies towards sublimated violence?

J.B. -, no.

DR. FREUD - Or perhaps a butterfly zat symbolises ze first book of your wife, 
hence associated in your mind with sex and power.  Yes, all marriage is 
at root ze struggle for dominance between ze man and ze woman...  until ze 
children come along, of course, vhereupon classical incestual abuse 
begins and ze children acquire repressed memories zat can only be 
recovered decades later through expensive hypnotherapy.  Zat is ze case 
here, no?

J.B. - !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DR. FREUD - Oh.  Vhat a shame.  Never mind, let's try zis card instead.  Yes,
zat's right, ze card has a picture of ze Doctor Who character, zat's 
right.  I believe you have co-written a Doctor Who novel and have anuzzer 
vun coming out very soon.  Do you like Doctor Who?

J.B. - Well, obviously.

DR.FREUD - You claim to like Doctor Who?  Ah, I see...  Very interesting
indeed...  Obviously you do not really believe zat you like zis programme; in 
reality you are waving your dominance about.  You do not have "likes" or 
"dislikes" except as zey relate to ze primal urges.  Yes, you wave your
dominance about, firm and rigid, in both hands.  Bigger and more solid zan
everyone else's.  Yes, yes...  Ze archetypal male action, indeed.  You don't
like Doctor Who at all!  It's all to do with sex!

J.B. - But I do like Doctor Who!

DR. FREUD - Ah, ze patient has gone into denial...  (makes notes>  Feels 
a deep psychological need to contradict ze therapist and assert his sexual 
dominance in ze interview situation.  Clearly intimidated by ze setting, 
all designed to make him feel less dominant and masculine: ze low 
lighting, ze couch...

J.B. - No, I'm contradicting you because you're talking bollocks.

DR. FREUD - Now ze patient brings genitalia into ze conversation...  Highly
significant, yes...  Clearly he is trying to draw attention to his own
reproductive capabilities.  However, since I am ze only other person in ze
room, we must conclude zat he is a repressed homosexual.  Have you told 
your wife about zis?

J.B. - I'm not gay!  We only got married last year!

DR. FREUD - Ah, she hasn't discovered yet.  She will, she will...  It is
pointless concealing zese things from yourself.  Denial will only 
increase ze psychological trauma.  You see, even now you still claim zat 
you like Doctor Who.

J.B. - But I do!

DR. FREUD - Again ze denial.  A serious case...  Patient's behaviour is as
predicted by my Freudian dynamic.  He is being ze archetypal male, 
refusing to be seen to lose ze argument and concede "feminine" weakness.

J.B. - You're not listening to what I'm saying!

DR. FREUD - Constructing a coherent argument is just anozzer way of 
asserting your power in ze conversation; you are making ze displays of 
dominance.  So vhen you try to deny ze truth of my observations, clearly 
zat is an attempt to elevate your rank in ze herd and improve your mating 
possibilities.  No?

J.B. - Oh bugger it, you're right.

DR. FREUD - I AM? ... I mean, of course I am, naturally...

J.B. - Well, it worked with Kate...

Finn Clark (> 2/5/98


>And on another personal note: Jean-Marc and Jon,
>you guys live to argue with each other, don't
>you? Why don't you just go on one of those
>debate shows on PBS and get it over with.

Oh wow.

I'd love to see that episode of 'Ricki' - 'He thinks the Looms are
canon - no way!'.

Lance Parkin (> 4/5/98


>>>Which story is that?

Paul Andinach ( wrote:
>> Doctor Who and the Amazing Zodin.

>Ah! ... I think that's "Terrible Zodin".

I think its a refernece to an earlier incarnation.

You know "Amazing Zodin","Incredible Zodin", "Uncanny Zodin", being
the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Zodins respectfully. 

I think "Terrible Zodin" is somewhere between the 12th and final

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> 4/5/98


[In response to a suggestion that the series will run out of Doctors]

Ummm ... I'm having a vision of the future ... 

'Hey, we got a hit on our hands, this Who show's been running for ten
years. We've spun out into feature films, the action figures are the
best selling toys in history and the books - while clearly
non-canonical - are regularly in the bestseller lists. The fans and
the mainstream audience love us and over half the world's population
tune in every week.''

'Yeah, but Eddie Izzard's the thirteenth Doctor.'

'I know, and he's just won twelve golden globes and three hundred
BAFTAs. Shame he's leaving, but Sean Connery's *begging* us to take
over, and he's waived his fee.'

'Yeah, but the *thirteenth* Doctor'

'Unlucky for some, so?'

'Well, in 'The Deadly Assassin' it was clearly established that once a
Time Lord reaches the end of thirteenth life, that's it. This point is
repeated in 'The Keeper of Traken' and 'Mawdryn Undead'.'

'Shit, you're right. Ah well. We'll have to cancel the show, then.'

Lance Parkin (> 4/5/98


Peter Anghelides wrote:
>>The disincentive for bringing back the Daleks is
>>that the estate of Terry Nation get 1/3rd of

Dangermouse wrote:
> 60%, actually, unless the price has dropped recently.

Perhaps you have more up-to-date info than I do. It was 1/3rd when I

BBC: Peter, suppose you could write a novel featuring the Daleks, but
you ahd to give 1/3rd of your fee to the estate of Terry Nation for
doing bugger all? Would you do it? 

Peter A: To hold in my hand a contract for a book which would outsell
all other books. To know that the tiniest pressure of my fingers on
the keyboard could generate untols sales and wealth. (Musical chord>
Yes! I would do it! Such power would set me up about Gareth Roberts!!
And through-the-Daleks- I-could-have-that-power!!!!! 

BBC: It's 60%, actually.

Peter A: Piss off, then.

Peter Anghelides (> 4/5/98


On 3 May 1998, VoidIndig0 wrote:

> Who  died  and  elected  you  proofreader  sorry  my   keyboard is
shot.  and
> it  would take  me  too much  money to get  a  new  one right
now.  you under
>  stood the post right?   so  there fore the  communication  was not
a problem.
>  next time  don't   criticize  what  you  don't know  after all
even the
> doctor  manage  to  travel  with a  busted tardis  for  years  you
can  offer
> me the  courtosy  of    reading  my  post  comig  from a  busted

This post works best if read in the style of the Cybermen voices from
"Tenth Planet"

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> 4/5/98


Philip Craggs wrote:
>Apparantly, the new BBC books companion is a 27 year old man from
>1963, to be introduced in a book (possibly) from Mike Collier. I
>must say that i don't think it will be a good idea. Even if the
>books are contemporary, he will need everything explaining to him
>(unless he is some sort of genius) you know, even colour TV's. 

Oh, yes.  I can't wait for this scene:

FITZ:  Flippin' 'eck, Doctor, what's that?

DOCTOR:  That?  It's a televisual device...

FITZ:  What?  You mean, like, a television?

DOCTOR:  Yes yes yes yes yes, that's what it is.

FITZ:  But... but it can't be a television!  It's nothing like a

DOCTOR:  What do you mean?

FITZ:  Well... there are all these... well, COLOURS!  All over the
screen!  EVERYBODY knows that televisions show everything in greys! 

DOCTOR:  No no no no no, Fitz.  Remember, this is 1973, not 1963. 
Technology has moved on. 

FITZ:  Gosh, Doctor, this advanced future technology is just too much
for me to cope with. 

JAMIE:  Are ye completely daft, Fitz?

DOCTOR:  Just be thankful we're to early for him to catch an episode


DOCTOR:  Never mind...

Corey Klemow (> 5/5/98


Philip Craggs (> wrote:
>>Apparantly, the new BBC books companion is a 27 year old man from >>1963,

Finn Clark (> wrote:
>I've got no problems with the "1963" bit, but the fact that he's a man 
>made me pause for thought.  An all-male TARDIS crew is rare, to put it 
>mildly.  There's no reason why it shouldn't work, but suddenly I'm 
>thinking of all those dodgy jokes people used to tell about Batman and 

"Sam?" said the Doctor, looking up from the console. "Might I ask you
a question?"

"Sure," said Sam, reading a copy of MADEMOISELLE.

"Sam... you're a man, aren't you?" the Doctor finally said.

Sam looked up and fluttered a set of eyelashes back by way of
response. "Well yes," Sam finally said, "but that didn't stop Fitz."

Greg McElhatton (icedrake at> 5/5/98


Philip Craggs wrote:
> Apparantly, the new BBC books companion is a 27 year old man from
> 1963, to be introduced in a book (possibly) from Mike Collier. I
> must say that i don't think it will be a good idea. Even if the
> books are contemporary, he will need everything explaining to him
> (unless he is some sort of genius) you know, even colour TV's. 

"Wow, man!  What is that crazy thing there, Doctor."
"Well, you know that big box in your living room showing moving
"Like a television, you mean?"
"Exactly!  This is very much the same.  But in colour."
".........?  Sorry, Doc.You've lost me"

Daniel Gooley (> 5/5/98


[Subject:  Re: Dr. Who MUD]

Dr. Who Mud? I knew this whole merchandizing thing has gone too far... 

Chris Schumacher (> 6/5/98


Chris Schumacher wrote:
>Dr. Who Mud? I knew this whole merchandizing thing has gone too far...

It's from an authentic BBC quarry.

Of course, the BBC destroyed a lot of their mud in the 70s, so fans have
had to reconstruct a lot of it from surviving specks of dirt mixed with
melted brown crayons.

Daniel Frankham (> 6/5/98


[Subject: Re: Co-authoring Novels]

Graham Nelson wrote: 
>> Fiction is not written by
>> committee, and I think it significant that not one "literary" novel
>> I'm aware of has ever been co-authored.  We do not read

>>      "Wuthering Park", by Jane Austen, Emily Bronte and Mrs Gaskell,
>>          with a cameo scene featuring UNIT by Keith Topping
>> and, I suggest, there's a very good reason for that...

David W Miller (> wrote:
>Hmm, I don't know.  I doubt that Jane could have done the UNIT scene
>with quite the flair that Keith gave it!

"Alistair Lethbridge-Stuart, pretty, young and clever, combined
in his person every advantage that a military upbringing and long
experience of dealing with civil servants in episode 3 could offer.
But it was a fact universally acknowledged that a young Army
Brigadier must be in want of an alien invasion.

It was the youngest of the Miss Grants, Josephine, who first
related to the family that Captain Yates was to be dining at
UNIT Vicarage, where Mr Magister had recently been given the
living, through his connection to the Dowager Lady Flavia.

"They say he has twelve thousand a year, think of that!"

As the governess, plain Miss Shaw of the Cambridgeshire Shaws,
entertained at the pianoforte, though Josephine was mad for
dancing, the evening was interrupted by a wheezing, groaning
noise.  The Brigadier had woken up.

"My dear Brigadier," said the Doctor, "as you know I have this
day returned from Bath, where my cousins -- I am, you will I
have no doubt remember, half human on my mother's side -- my
cousins the Borusas have a town house in Gallifrey-Street.
>From such signs and news as I have been able to obtain, I believe
that the intent of these visitors from Skaro is to encourage
openly lewd theatrical entertainments by means of a new device
known as the kinematograph, which it seems may present moving

Mr Lethbridge-Stuart's apoplexy was such that his black eye-
patch at once fell out, and Miss Shaw was engaged to finding it,
while the footman, Benton, presented the tantalus of sherry and
the walnuts..."

...yes, I see what you mean.

Graham Nelson (> 6/5/98


[Subject: Re: Co-authoring Novels]

Graham Nelson (> wrote:
>"Alistair Lethbridge-Stuart, pretty, young and clever, combined
>in his person every advantage that a military upbringing and long
>experience of dealing with civil servants in episode 3 could offer.
>But it was a fact universally acknowledged that a young Army
>Brigadier must be in want of an alien invasion.

>It was the youngest of the Miss Grants, Josephine, who first
>related to the family that Captain Yates was to be dining at
>UNIT Vicarage, where Mr Magister had recently been given the
>living, through his connection to the Dowager Lady Flavia.

>"They say he has twelve thousand a year, think of that!"

Miss Bell, who was well acquainted with Mr Yates through her employment 
at the Vicarage, discreetly leaned over and whispered in Miss Grant's 
ear. Miss Grant's eyes opened considerably wider than some persons of 
more vintage generations might consider proper for a young lady in mixed 

"Oh," said Miss Grant, her cheeks inexplicably crimson. "It would appear
that, despite his bachelorhood, Mr Yates is not, at this present time, in
need of a wife."

Daniel Frankham (> 7/5/98


[Subject: Re: New Leekley Refererences in BBC Books]

Jean-Marc Lofficier (> wrote:
>No, not at all.  I'm just saying that it enables us (me) to infer that the
>Doc's origins may be the result of a Time Lord marrying an Earthwoman
>(details open to arguments) rather than Loom-derived, as assumed by NA

>At best, it opens the door to two arguably valid possibilities.
>That's all.

In my forthcoming BBC proposal, I intend to base a book on the Karen McCoy 
Gallifrey. Thrill as the Gallifreyan mob storms up the mountain carrying 
torches to lynch the hermit for his evil science experiments. Gasp as two 
rival Gallifreyan airlines compete for business. Shudder as the forces of 
continuity threaten to engulf us all.

Robert Smith? (> 8/5/98


Jon Blum (> wrote:
>Contrast this with 1997, where all seven eighth Doctor books (including
>"Dying Days") featured an old monster in some form...

Is it really fair to refer to Jo Grant as 'an old monster'?

David Atkins (> 8/5/98


 - Robert Smith?

Continue on to the next Quote file (May/Jun '98)

Go back to the previous Quote file (Mar/Apr '98)

Go back to the Quote directory