The Captain Kirk Problem: How Doctor Who Betrayed Matt Smith

This is an article written by Ted Kissell for The Atlantic. He makes a comparison between Captian Kirk's stories from Star Trek and the later episodes in Matt Smith's tenure. Apparently, a show where the main character always wins is not always the most interesting. I agree with many of his points, but I believe many of the criticised episodes bring more to the table then what he suggests.  Still, the driving line of the article is "Matt Smith deserved better." And I think I agree with that.

Why I Do Not Have A Favorite Doctor

          When I was working on my Bachelor's degree, I had a roommate who got me a poster with all the Doctors on it. He knew it would bother me and I hated it! Not because it wasn't a good poster, or because I do not like Doctor Who merchandise, but because to me posters are intended for other people, not me.

          If I have a One Piece poster on my wall (which I do) it's so that everyone who comes into my room learns I like One Piece. I know it is supposed to be something I enjoy, but whenever I want to express my interests, I think about how I'm communicating those interests to others. I already know I like One Piece, so I don't need a poster to tell myself that. I have the poster so that everyone else knows. 

          As for Doctor Who, I have a TARDIS poster. It is displayed proudly over my bed. I also have a few toy screwdrivers in my pencil cup (Capaldi's is the best! Not opinion, fact!). I love Doctor Who merchandise but I can't stand for posters or anything depicting some or all the Doctors for two reasons: 1) There will always be more Doctors so the posters will become out of date 2) I think anything I have shown an image of a certain Doctor conveys a favoritism of that Doctor.  Essentially, I can't have a poster of Matt Smith because everyone will think Matt Smith is my favorite Doctor. 

         The only reason this is an issue is that I do not have a favorite Doctor. I love different aspects of each of them. I love how dark 12 can be, I love how emotional 10 is, I love the epicness of 11, I love how complex 9 was, I love how methodical 7 was near the end, I love how badass 3 was, and many more aspects about each of them. To me, choosing a favorite Doctor is not fair since they all bring their own strengths to the character. Both how they are written and acted changes so often. If you ask me which doctor was the best serious Doctor, it would be between 9 and 12, if you ask me which gave the best speeches, it would probably be 11. I love all the Doctors for different reasons. So I cannot get a David Tennant poster because everyone who comes in my room would think he's my favorite.

         I have a favorite companion (Clara, sorry Ace), I have a favorite screwdriver (12's! No, seriously, it's the best), I even have a favorite episode (Listen). I once had a tiny radio times poster for Listen in my room. But choosing a favorite episode is not nearly as impossible as choosing a favorite Doctor. 

Canonicity in Doctor Who

          In researching my next article, relating to continuity and canonicity in Doctor Who, I came across a blog post from none other than Paul Cornell! For those of us that don't know, Mr. Cornell is a successful author who has written two episodes of Doctor Who. We have to thank him for: "Father's Day" and "Human Nature/Family of Blood" from series 1 and 3.
         It is truly bittersweet to find this article since I essentially wanted to write it. Mr. Cornell does a great job outlining the different mediums of Doctor Who's story and explaining why fifty years of contradictions is what gives the show its longevity.  
          To sum up what I wanted to say, ironically I'll use a perfect quote from him:
          "That doesn't mean we lose the lovely thought that Doctor Who is all one big story. It's one big and very complex story, that rewrites and contradicts itself. That was always the case. Only now it does it with purpose, rather than by accident."