The rec.arts.drwho Quote File - Sep/Oct. 2000

Courtesy of Robert J. Smith

Submissions and comments should be sent to Robert Smith)

Guest Editor:  Keith Brookes

I am using my last 2 minutes of internet time to post this.  Not sure if the
first one went through, so...


[Re:  Tenth planet 4 - found]

> (( How could you have found Ep 4 - I've got it hidden in my attic >>
> Crap, I've been robbed! Hand it over you thief....

A-hem, perhaps you should return it to me, once you've got it back.
It was my copy in the first place.
YOU SAID YOU LOVED ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>

Well that's just what we call pillow talk, baby....

Bokman7757 (> 3/9/2000


>"The Doctor" (> wrote in message
>> In article
>> Paul Andinach  (> wrote:
>> >On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, DavisK wrote:
>> >
>> >> Agreed.  Delgado's Master was evil, but there were moments when he
>> >> showed some vulnerability, and the Doctor pitied him.  I didn't
>> >> really feel the same way about Ainley's Doctor.
>> >
>> >I don't know; I reckon Ainley's Doctor was really pitiful. ;)
>> >
>> Ainley's Doctor was non-existant.

No, Ainley's doctor exists.  Who do you think had to prescribe Ainley the
cure for the skin rashes caused by years of cheap crepe-hair goatees?

Rufus T. Firefly (> 3/9/2000


>The Doctor (> wrote:
>Keith Brookes (> wrote:
>>The Doctor (> wrote in message
>>> You sir are a nutter.
>>Look who's talking, homeboy.
>Homeboy.  Talk about dull!

Ah welcome to rec.arts.drwho. See the clash of the intellectual titans.  The
wit.  The depth.  The sheer genius.  Am I the only one here sitting on the
edge of my seat wondering how Keith will manage to save face?  Imagine the
shame of being declared a nutter, by someone who had the same title bestowed
on him, in this very newsgroup, when Keith was still in diapers.  If only we
had thought to call Dave a homeboy back then; imagine what would have become
of the world.  Probably would have brought Doctor Who back from it's brief
hiatus, and we would still be watching the new adventures of Sylv and Sophie
... oh hang on, sorry ... this is Dave's wet dream.  sorry ...

Nicholas Fitzpatrick (> 5/9/2000


On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Matt Michael wrote:

> The script makes many snide comments about Colin Baker's Doctor
> (reflecting Saward's belief that he was miscast), for example 'You
> are a great disappointment, Doctor' 'Most people feel that way!'
> and 'Your gratuitous use of violence often disturbs me'.

"Your gratuitous use of violence often disturbs me"?

What an odd line to find in a Saward script.

Paul Andinach (> 8/9/2000


[Re:  Bonnie Langford and her wife...I mean husband, sorry]

Marcus Durham wrote in message ...
>Bonnie Langford is one of the most talented actresses of the 20th
>centuary. Her acting ability is second to none and her contribution to
>Doctor Who cannot be faulted. The free world owes a debt of gratitude to
>Miss Langford. She is said to prevent war, hunger and disease. She is
>also very talented and has appeared in many high quality high profile
>productions with the greatest stars from stage and screen.

    So, basically, the reason for legal action is because Bonnie's husband
is laboring under the delusion that he married Julia Roberts?

Tony Velasquez (> 11/9/2000


(LPPCQ Snarky):
In the cold, empty wasteland of the Plateau of Leng, the wind howled.
Messages from rec.arts.drwho magically appeared on various pieces of slate.
On one, this despairing scrawl from Adam Richards:
>>Whether I think Julia's talented or not, there's a certain matter of
>>scale involved between her and Ms. Langford, Snarky. Like the
>>difference between a three course meal and, well, McDonalds.
>More like *Burger King* and McDonald's, I thought....;-P

Is Julia Roberts soggy and tasteless?

Ed Jefferson (> 12/9/2000


[Re:  Which Cybermen costumes did you prefer?]

> > I rather like the "Moonbase" / "Tomb" / "Circle styles....
> ...*Circle*???

Yep, short for "Like a Circle in a Spiral Like a Wheel Within a Wheel From

Bokman7757 (> 14/9/2000


[Re:  The DW Manual]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 12:29:39 +0100, "Richard Develyn"
(> wrote:

> It says 1982 inside it, but AFAICS it's Davison's first - was there
> ever a 1981 one?

Excerpts from the 1982 Doctor Who Manual...

People the Doctor spends time with for two or more consecutive stories
are called "Companions". They should be young, and preferably female.
The Doctor's relationship with his Companions is one of the most important
aspects of the show - this relationship is mostly one of bickering and
whining. Companions are very useful storytelling devices: ideal for getting
separated from the Doctor and having to be rescued, joining up with the
villains, or bickering if the episode is running short.

This is extremely important. The fans like to see clips from previous shows,
characters from previous shows, monsters from previous shows,
and references to previous shows. They mostly haven't seen the previous
shows - or if they have, they don't remember them very well - so it doesn't
have to be right. If in doubt, ask Ian Levine.

Always the same. The Doctor's lack of body odour is a Time Lord gift
he allows his companions to share. So is his lack of dress sense.

The Cybermen like baseball. The Cyberleader is a Cyberman who has done a
management course where he learned to say "Excellent". The Cybermen used to
be hard to write for, as they were so invulnerable; since it was discovered
that gold kills them, they have become a lot easier to write for.

Daniel Frankham (> 15/9/2000


"Paul Gordon" (> wrote in message
> Just uploaded the cover for November's Eighth Doctor novel "Endgame" by
> Terrance Dicks.

But according to Amazon, *Terry Nation* has miraculously managed to write
"Endgame" despite having been dead for three years. It's a neat trick if you
can do it. That Roger Hancock, he'll do anything for his 10%...

Daniel Blythe (> 9/19/2000


The Doctor wrote:

> Colin Baker is a cat lover.

That's a damn lie and I understand it's legal in Gwala Duanu and anyway I
burned the photos!!!!

Finn Clark (> 17/9/2000


[Re: Could the Doctor regenerate into a teenager?]

"The Daleks! Wanting to take over the Universe *again*? That is *so* unfair!
I HATE you!"
(Stomps off into his bedroom.)

Daniel Blythe (> 20/9/2000


[This was originally about on-screen swearing, but I have no idea why Yads
named off Romana and Peri...]

"The Doctor" (> wrote in message
> Romana and Peri .

I remember the scene you're talking about.  That was one of my favorite

PERI:  Wow, it's so cool to meet someone who travelled with the Doctor
before me!
ROMANA:  Indeed.  I can't say his tastes in companions improved with time.
PERI:  What?  What the hell was that supposed to mean?
ROMANA:  I'm only pointing out that I, a Time Lady, will be followed by you,
just a lowly human, albeit one with tits that put me to a bit of shame.
PERI:  Hey, I don't have to take that kind of shit from you!  I don't care
if you are some kind of Time Bitch.
ROMANA:  How dare you, you impertinent sod?  You can never fucking hope to
raise to a suitable level to be able to try and give ME that sort of crap.
PERI:  Oh, shove it up your tight ass, Romanowhatever.  You're just jealous
of my amazing rack.
ROMANA:  Listen, jiggly-knockers.  Do you know the solution to Fermat's last
fucking theorem?  Hm?  Compared to me, you're a little dog, pissing on the
ground and licking it's bollocks.  If you think you can-
PERI:  Alright, Time-twat.  That does it!!
(PERI lands a right cross, taking ROMANA by surprise.  The blow knocks her
into a convenient nearby mud puddle, and PERI jumps in after her.  The
ladies struggle in the mud, pulling hair, teairing blouses, etc.  The FOURTH
and SIXTH DOCTORS sit at a safe distance, sharing a large bag of popcorn.
FOURTH DOCTOR:  I've got to hand it to you, old fellow.  This is one of your
better ideas.
SIXTH DOCTOR:  Indeed, everything's going quite to plan.  Popcorn?

Rufus T. Firefly (> 21/9/2000


Little Jonn wrote:

> > Anyways, Magrs would probably make it through.  The only differences
> > would be that _The Scarlet Empress_ would have a more substantial
> > plot than "group of people travel across a planet" (which would be good)
> > and there would have been a more definitive link between the parallel
> > narratives in _The Blue Angel_ (which could go either way, frankly).
> But the point was that these were narrative experiments. They were
> ideas for Doctor Who. They bring something to the series that no other
> do. I think we'd be poorer without them.

Why am I suddenly thinking of the parrot sketch around now?

"This story has no plot."

"No, no, it's experimental."

"Look my lad, I know a story without a plot and I'm looking at one right

"No it's not plotless, it's experimental."


"Yeah. Remarkable book The Scarlet Empress. Beautifully written, innit?"

"The prose don't enter into it. It's plot is absent."

"No, it's experimental. Never been done before."

"All right then, if it's never been done before, I'll see if it's challenged
my perceptions."

(picks up book and reads it again>

"No, I felt like there was something there I hadn't seen in an Angela Carter
book, but it still looks as though it hasn't got a plot."

(shopkeeper slips an original story in the pages>

"There it's got a plot."

"No it hasn't. You put that in yourself."

"I did not!"

"Yes you did."

(picks up book and reads it out>

"Hellooo bunch of tedious archetypes! Helloooo rotten resolving of key plot
points! Hellooooo characters doing stuff for no apparent reason!"

(throws the book on the floor>

"Now that's what I call a plotless book."

"No, you're missing it's true purpose."

"Look my lad, I've had just about enough of this. The book has definitely
got no plot. And when I bought it not half an hour ago, you assured me that
it's lack of any kind of storytelling point was due to it being an
intellectual challenge worthy of something other than Doctor Who."

"It... probably should be a book that isn't Doctor Who."

"A book that isn't Doctor Who? What kind of talk is that?  Look, why has it
got the Doctor Who logo on the front?"

"These books prefer messing about with stuff that isn't connected to
anything else. Great book, very challenging."

"Look, I took the liberty of examining the commissioning of this book, and I
discovered that the author isn't actually a Doctor Who fan."

"Well naturally he isn't a Doctor Who fan. He prefers to take a different
perspective on Doctor Who from other writers."

"Look matey, this author wouldn't have a new perspective on Doctor Who if I
shot four thousand Lawrence Miles books through him. He's bleedin' preaching
his own agenda."

"He's not. He's challenging our perceptions."

"He's not challenging. He's trying to be clever. This book has no plot. It
is a bunch of literary clichés. It's insulting the reader by pretending it's
clever when it blatantly can't string two plot points together. It's an
amalgam of the author's true loves and things he vaguely remembers from
Doctor Who. It's pretentious. Bereft of plot, it egotistically ignores one
of the things what's great about Doctor Who. If he bothered to create an
interesting plot it would be a masterpiece! It's treating it's audience with
contempt and thinking it can get away with it by charming us with a load of
hackneyed magical realism guff taken from sources the author thinks we're
not aware of.  *This* is a book with no plot."

"Well I'd better replace it then."

"If you want to get anything done in this country, you've got to complain
till you're blue in the mouth."

"Sorry guv, we've only got The Blue Angel."

"Has it got an interesting plot?

"Not really. It's got a Star Trek parody, though."

"Well it's scarcely a replacement then, is it?"

Klaus Pumpkin (> 21/9/2000


Alryssa Kelly (alryssa@the-eighth-doctor.communal> wrote:

> To hopefully try to clarify this for you; In Britain the percentage
> (apparently) of gay men in DW fandom is _very_ high.

A fact for which some of us are on our knees continually and giving thanks.
Naturally, some people find it all a bit much to swallow, but one only has
to check out some of the the country's most well-respected organs to get a
feel of the sheer number of column-inches involved.  Indeed, one merely has
to look around at all the fine, stout members of etc, etc and so forth until
we all lose the will to live.

In fact - and I *know* this for a fact - every single man who has so much as
heard the words 'Doctor Who' is a flagrant old whoopsie who can never turn
around suddenly for fear of braining passers-by with his sequinned handbag.
Every actor, producer, director and writer -scriptsand books - takes it up
the shitter on a regular basis, with the exception of Terrance Dicks, who in
a manner similar to that of George Eliot, has the true name of Mavis B
Slater and took on the pseudonymic surname in homage to certain
accoutrements utilised in her notoriously Sapphic activities ...

The only other exception is of course me, because unlike others I'm a real
man, with muscles like rugby balls, a nob like a morningstar and I wouldn't
know what to do with a man's penis if it was right in front of my face. And
neither does my wife. I love Mr Long so much for his courageous stand
against the filthy tide of man-on-man depravity that is RUNING DR WOH that I
want to give him a big sloppy kiss right on his bottom.

Oh, all right. But I only help 'em out when they get busy. And so does
my wife. Mind me slingbacks.

Dave Stone (> 24/9/2000


In article (>,
Nick Lancaster (> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:53:00 GMT, (James)

>>I'm nnnot sure if it's Saward or -Cartmel-, but I distinctly remember
>>a skinny little anorak of a man with a buzzcut, squinting through some
>>glasses, at the end of a DWM interview, and it was definitely one of
>>the two, heh.  A most annoying photo!

>That's probably Cartmel. Saward, IIRC, was a large man who looked like
>a biker.

I now have more insight into the way JNT selected his script-editors than I
ever needed.

Robert Smith? (smithrj2@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA> 9/24/2000


[Re:  Silly poll revisited]

>> 12. TV show we LEAST want to see crossover with Doctor Who:
> Who wants to be a millionaire

Doctor Who Wants To Be A Millionaire!, surely.

Regis: "So, Mr. Meddling Monk, here's your $100 question. '2 + 2 = what?' Is
it A:3, B:4, C:6, D:A Banana?"

Monk: "A, I believe, Regis. It's A - 3."

Regis: "You're kidding, right?"

Monk: "Honestly, it's A. Final answer."

Regis: "Hate to say this, Meddling, but you're ... right??? How can this be?
Some jerk's gone through and altered the entire basis of mathematics, and
2+2 now equals 3."

Monk: (Twiddles thumbs, whistles, and refuses to look Regis in the eye)

Benjamin F. Elliott (> 25/9/2000


Dave Stone wrote:

> The structurality of almost *anything* I write is based on what Michael
> Moorcock said about writing his Jerry Cornelius books

To be honest, I'd never really registed Moorcock as an influence on your
books, apart from the interestingly filthy double intendre in the name.
Someone once said that the great literary sf writers all have an unfortunate
tendency to sound like pseudonyms used on gay porn novels
(Moorcock, Phil Dick, J.G. Ballard if you changed a few letters, etc)
Actually I think it was Neil Gaiman, who's hardly in a better position, now
is he?

Daniel O'Mahony (> 26/9/2000


>"Jonn Elledge" (> wrote:
> "Cliff Bowman" (c.bowman@linetwo.internet> wrote in message
> news:8qiqam$417$
> > "Jonathan Blum" (> wrote in message
> > news:8qh2g9$89i$
> >
> > Taken to e-mail.
> Why do those words suddenly sound so frightening...?

Because everyone's imagining the scene:

Cliff: Jon, you're going off script here.  It clearly states on page 13
that you're supposed to rant like a bastard after I catch you in a
double-standard, not go for the moralistic high ground.

Jon: Yes, I know.  You know how hard it is for me to follow the script
with my improv background, though!  :)  Besides, I thought that the
"moralistic high ground" angle was more plausible for my character.

Cliff: I thought you were worried about being typecast.

Jon: Nah, I've already shown my range as both "beleaguered professional" and
"wise insider".  What have you done beyond "rational, yet capable of

Cliff: Play to your strengths, that's my motto.  Look what it did for
Azaxyr.  He still has the highest ratings ever!

(Apologies to both of you.  :)

deX! (> 26/9/2000


> "Paul Rhodes" (> wrote in message
> news:8qsdv7$g5n$
> > Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Paul Rhodes wrote:
> > > > An Unearthly Child, The Daleks, Edge of Inside the Spaceship of
> > > > Destruction, Marco Polo...  - all clearly experimental.
> > > I'm not sure I would call AUC experimental for the series; my first
> > > reaction is to agree it was experimental for the medium.
> >
> > It's the first one. Of course it was experimental.

Yeah, it was totally Rad - all the Trad fans were going on about how they
preferred it when it wasn't a TV show but just a few lines in the Radio
Times, and how the introduction of the Doctor and the TARDIS had ruined a
promising show...

Jonn Elledge (> 27/9/2000


[You might be a Shobogan if...]

I adapted this list from the 'Redneck Jedi' one, because
I felt like it.

You might be a Shobogan (Gallifreyan/ex-Time Lord
redneck) if:

* Your TARDIS is trailer shaped. And the same size
inside too.

* You've built your outhouse over the Eye of Harmony.

* Your regenerations are all caused by:
  a) Blindness and death from drinking home-made alcohol
  b) Fried own head after cleaning staser.
  c) Accidentally timerammed your previous self while
     D(your TARDIS)UI

* The spaceship graveyard on Karn looks like your own
  yard, but cleaner, and these ships actually have a
  chance in the Death Zone of ever flying again.

* You are member of secret society dedicated to showing
  them Ogrons their place in the world

* Your family can't afford a Loom like them fancypants
  Time Lords in the Capitol, so you have to pool your
  genetic material by a rather more circuituous method.

* Your trailer is halfway up a mountain, not far the
  crazy hermits. Oh no, the Doctor's a redneck!

Merlin The Time Traveller (> 28/9/2000


> "Jonn Elledge" wrote:
> >"Cliff Bowman" (c.bowman@linetwo.internet> wrote in message
> >news:8qte1n$1t4$
> >> You say that in jest I'm sure - but have you actually *read* the back
> >> of the next week's issue? You know - the page where reader comments end
> >up?
> >> Because actually...
> >
> >I haven't... And now I'm scared. What did they say?

"Dear BBC, the other day, I, my wife, my three sons and the dog turned on
the television set as I had heard about an exciting new program called Dr
Who.  As it started, I was extremely pleased to see a policeman. He looked
like an especially good policeman, investigating that junkyard and that
mist.  I looked forward to many weeks of his fabulous exploits. The
policeman of the mist instantly became my, my wife and my three sons (oh,
and the dog)'s favourite television character ever. So we were most
perplexed by the disappearance of the 'policeman in the mist' character (or
as we call him 'PC Mist').  Surely he should have been investigating that
dirty bugger living with a little girl in stolen police property, or the
stalking of said girl by two teachers? We thought maybe he would turn up at
the end, to save the day? But did he?  Did he b*ll*cks."

Ed Jefferson (> 29/9/2000


> William December Starr (> wrote:
> > Given that we're talking about the meanderings of Paul Magrs here, how
> > else _can_ I feel?  All I can see is that you people _are_ being fooled.
> > (Not that Magrs is necessarily aware of this, mind you; I can easily
> > believe that _he_ believes that he's clever and artistic as all getout.)

A: Oooh, this coffee is just what I wanted.
B: No it isn't.
A: What?
B: You can't possibly like coffee.
A: I do. And this is *good* coffee.
B: Nobody can like coffee. I've tried it. It's bitter, it makes you jittery
and it has no nutritional value. Anybody who says they like coffee is either
deluded, or just pretending to like it because he thinks it trendy and
A: Will you please leave me alone and let me enjoy my coffee?

Miche Doherty (> 30/9/2000


[Re: (Pro Fun) Budget Doctor Who] wrote:
> In the same vein as ISIHAC's game, suppose Doctor
> Who really did have a budget of about tuppence.

Yeah, they easily had 4 to 6 pennies.

The Key of Marinus

An Earthly Child

The One Doctor

The Pewter Nemesis

The Local Toymaker

The Near Water Menace

The Afternoon of the Daleks

The Mysterious Place

Robot (remains unchanged as they didnt spend more the tuppence in the
first place judging by the title)

Charles Daniels (> 1/10/2000


[Re: Iris Wildthyme]

> Keith Brookes wrote in message ...
> >...To write a Doctor Who story without Iris Wildthyme?  I mean, she's a
> good
> >character and all, but is he going to continue until every
> >team has met her?!
> >
Doctor: "Paul, if you had created a companion, capable of canvassing all of
time and space, invading continuity, causing havoc for every known figure in
recorded history, would you make her?"

Magrs: "A fascinating idea."

Doctor: "But would you do it"

Magrs: "To have a companion with such a scale, to know that history and
peoples' sanity could be manipulated by my creation. My little finger ...
releasing an Iris on the universe. Yes. I would do it. Such power would set
me above the Blums. And with Iris Wildthyme, I Shall Have That Power!"

(extract from Genesis Of The Wildthymes)

Benjamin F. Elliott (> 3/10/2000


>Rufus T. Firefly (> wrote:

>> Which is a red one.  Again, quite nice, but the Doctor seems to be
>> distracted by a red, blurry whoosh going past his face.

> He's looking at Peri, who was extra jiggly in this one.

Is there an online ratings guide available based purely on jiggliness?

Charles Daniels (> 4/10/2000


[A vision: the future of Dr Who...]

2,400 Eighth Doctor novels to read...

more stories sandwiched between The Horns of Nimon and The Leisure Hive than
there were in the whole TV-transmitted line-up...

books of all the scripts that writers who never wrote for Dr Who idly
imagined palming off on the show but never got round to writing down...

the person who played Benton as a baby in The Time Monster doing
Festival Q+As...

"I Was A Gell Guard in The Three Doctors" tell-all memoirs...

DWM Gallifrey Guardian headlines:

"Tom Baker not dead, just 'fed up and hiding'"
"Fan Sacrifice of Alan Yentob Before Statue of Nicholas Courtney"

DWM features: The roots of post-2005 Depression-era Fan Hopelessness

"Rads vs Trads - the latest"

Mmmmm the future looks good tonight!

Adrian Tripod (> 4/10/2000


[EDAs and PDAs]

On 4 Oct 2000, Charles Daniels wrote:

> Something happen?
> Tor confused.
> Chris explain.

Yes, well somewhere at the dawn of time, something went down and existence
sorta happened, although there's enough room to debate that in fact nothing
did happen, and we are actually all waiting for the begining to start so we
can get on with reading the EDAs, which are exactly like PDAs except
different which leads to the concept that if they are different then in fact
reality does exist, and if they aren't different then we all are actually a
used car salesman from Peoria, except that Peoria doesn't exist yet, so in a
temporal sense we all will be him when he [and by consequence, we] all exist
sometime in the future when we would all be reading the as yet theoretical
novels based on the non-existant BBC [which also doesn't exist] television
[never invented] series Doctor Who.

Hope that clears it up....or did you mean some other Chris?

Chris Rednour (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> 10/4/2000


[Re: What is on Paul McGann's mind?]

7. I know Catherine Zeta Jones. Heh heh heh.

6. I coulda kicked those Aliens' arses, if they'd only given me a
chance. Even without big hair!

5. "Monty, you terrible cunt!" Heh heh, that never gets old.

4. I'd really like to work with Eric Roberts again. He was a
consummate professional 100% dedicated to his art, and fun to be
around too. Zeeep zeep boop, wibble.

3. Next time I'll ask Gary Russell if I can wear the hair extensions
in the studio.

2. Just how many brothers do I have again?

1. How come everyone raves about Richard E Grant? I was *I*, for

Daniel Frankham (> 8/10/2000


[Re:  Primitive, but unmistakeably a Dalek]

Paul Andinach wrote in message ...
>A thought that occurred to me during an incredibly boring lecture this
>The "primitive" Daleks in 'Genesis', from what I recall, were
>self-contained and could leave their home base with no problems.
>Supposedly more advanced models seen in some other stories relied on
>energy transferred to them from an external power supply.

"It will take us at least 1,000 years to dig ourselves out of this bunker.
We need to optimize our ability to be able to use the Kaled city structure."

"That will require diverting power."

"Take it from the assembly that deals with traveling outside. We won't need
it for 1,000 years."

(1,000 Years)

"OK. We have dug ourselves out. Who has the instructions for restoring the
assembly for traveling outside?"

"Only Davros. And a few scientists."

"Who we exterminated?"


"Oh well. Too difficult to try to do it again. How about we drop a neutron
bomb on everything instead?"


Benjamin F. Elliott (> 9/10/2000


In article (8rr1ha$ou8$>,
William December Starr (> wrote:
>In article (8rg6bv$u3b$>,
>"Daniel Blythe" (> said:

>> 3) That the three Silurians in _Doctor Who and the Silurians_ were
>> actually called Okdel, Morka and K'to. I was about 20 before I
>> discovered this one wasn't true...

>Could you explain this one a bit please?

I'll have a go.

He thought the three Silurians were named onscreen in serial BBB. But they
weren't, it was only in the novelisation (and/or Warriors of the Deep). In
the serial, they were just "Old Silurian", Young Silurian" and "Silurian for
sexual favours".

Robert Smith? (smithrj2@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA> 10/9/2000


[Re:  Mrs Who]

"Merlin The Time Traveller" wrote

> "She exists, and the Doctor is very fond of her."
> Does anyone else out there believe that the Doctor has a wife? I do,
> (where else would Susan come from?). I would like to see, in the final
> DW story, the Doctor return home to Gallifrey, and go back to his
> faithful, patient wife, and have a happy retirement.

Boy, is he going to have some explaining to do once she discovers all those
girls clothes in the TARDIS....

Gavin Winters (> 10/10/2000


Merlin The Time Traveller wrote:
>* That the authors, rather than being slaves to Doctor Who, as they
>should, have now forced the good Doctor to be their slave: making him
>do what they want, not what he wants.

Justin Richards: Ok, everyone here's the plan- we have the Doctor trapped on
Earth for a century!

Jon Blum: NO!

Justin: Any reason why not?

Jon: The Doctor. He speaks to my in my head. He told me that he doesn't want

Justin: Ah, screw him, I'll do it anyway. BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.
I am evil.

Jon: (whimpers to himself> I tried Doctor, I tried, please no, not again
(screams as he beats himself round the head with a copy of War of the

Ed Jefferson (> 13/10/2000


On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:14:36 -0700, Chris Casino (>

>I read in Doctor Who: A Celebration by Peter Haining that
>both of these guys were friendly and likable guys when
>you met them offscreen. I'm really not all that surprised
>to hear that. You notice how the actors who play such
>despicable bad guys on screen are usually the nicest people
>in the world off screen most of the time? I suppose playing the
>complete opposite of what kind of person you really are just
>comes naturally to actors.

In his spare time Tom Baker takes over planets and enslaves their

Daniel Frankham (> 13/10/2000


[Re:  Disappointments]

Chris Rednour  (gs06cjr@panther.Gsu.EDU> wrote:
>What's a "special effect" in a book? Multi-coloured typeface?


thing in


where the type goes

all over the


Robert Smith? (smithrj2@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA> 14/10/2000


[Re: Dr. Who & The Red Dwarf?!?!?!]

sr.wilson (> wrote in message
> Doug Dennis (> wrote in message
> news:8saeuq$
> >
>  ?!?!?!
I think the writer is using the blankness to show us the pain he feels over
the endings of these two shows.  The thoughts must have weighed heavy on
him -- maybe if he had gotten more people to 'Save Doctor Who', maybe if he
had sent another script in, the world could have been changed and we would
all be enjoying his view of Doctor Who today.  But no, he did not, and now
he wallows in a pit of despair, clutching the lyrics to Doctor in Distress
and his 7th Doctor/Ace script to his pale body, his guilt leaving him a
sprawled, dying mess on the living room carpet.

That, or he's a fucking weirdo.

Keith Brookes (> 15/10/2000


Mr. Slater wrote:

> Well with that dealt with  left with the choice of Parasite
> or jumping ahead to Alien Bodies. Any advice?

This sounds like a job for Finn's Patented Enjoyabilityometer!  If YOU have
a tricky dilemma, just plug it into the F.P.E. and see what rating comes out
at the end!  Give it a go!  In order from most to least enjoyable:

Being given the complete rights to Doctor Who in perpetuity plus the
financial resources to make ten years' worth of episodes, due to an
unfortunate mistake at the BBC's legal department.
Sharing a bath with Nicola Bryant.
Alien Bodies.
Watching a Doctor Who story you've never seen before.
Colin's "ten million years of absolute power" speech in Trial episode 13.
In fact all of Tom's companions pre-JNT.
Every word written by Stephen Wyatt.
Rewatching fifth Doctor stories over and over again, just for Peter
Davison's acting.
The second Doctor and his companions, who are so much better than anyone on
British TV today that it makes you wonder if BBC TV Centre was invaded by
aliens in 1994.
Laughing at Divided Loyalties.
Public slanging matches between authors.
Playing spot-the-typo.
Not having the willpower to stop yourself buying a piece of Doctor Who
merchandise, even though you know it'll be rubbish.
Dalek continuity, these days.
The way the BBC's distributors seem to dislike YOU.
Canon debates.
People who just Won't Shut Up.
The late eighties DWM comic strips of Simon Furman.
Gary Russell's ever-enjoyable continuity references.
Police Academy: Mission to Moscow
Cerebral haemorrhages.
Samantha Jones.
Steve Cole's editing.
Steve Cole's original novels, once you start thinking about them afterwards.
Sharing a bath with Gary Downie.
Being tied up in a basement and tortured, then chewed to death by rats.
Being an incidental character in a Jim Mortimore novel.

Hope this helps!

Finn Clark (> 15/10/2000


[Re:  A toast]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 04:00:11 GMT, "Keith Brookes"
(> wrote:

>Hte Trasme (> wrote in message
>> On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 03:54:19 GMT, "Keith Brookes"
>> (> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hte Trasme (> wrote in message
>> >news:39eaa50c.41044107@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
>> >> Here's to effective use of time.
>> >>
>> >Here's to Doctor Who, with which I waste my time.
>> >
>> Here's to Doctor Who fans, who waste time and think they can use their
>> cardboard TARDIS to get it back.
>You mean we can't?  DAMN!!!!!!
>(He stomps on his cardboard TARDIS>

I can't even stomp on mine. Temporal grace.

Hte Trasme (> 16/10/2000


>DavisK (> wrote in article
>> I was wondering if anyone read or heard anywhere about the purpose of
>> vent in the back of the necks of the Sontarans?  It's not just there so
>> people have a way to kill them, is it?  The Doctor Who book about The
>> Seventies calls it something like '..probic vent'.
>In the show, it's explained that they can plug in there to draw on energy
>from their ships' engines.
>In Bob Holmes' original briefing paper about them, he suggests they have
>sex with it as well...

I tried tot resist the urge to say, "It would give a new meaning to the
phrase 'giving head'", but I don't think I tried hard enough.....

C.A. Reed Jr. (> 19/10/2000

Keith B.

Keith Brookes, the Canadian homeboy, currently reading Business Unusual by
Gary Russell

"Hey baby, I explode like a can of Nitro-9 and twice as fast..."

WKRP in Androzani -- It's not just any catharsis of spurious morality!

Who, Me?-A site not interested in dirty words such as 'facts'

Continue onto the next Quote file (Nov/Dec 2000)

Go back to the previous Quote file (July/Aug. 2000)

Go back to the Quote directory