So where is everybody else upto at this point? Personally it's 3 weeks since I finished Banquo, and I'm *really* looking forward to this, especially becuase of the sample on the Telepress mailing list. 6 days until release!

*Looks embittered* Well, I'm STILL only up to Yquatine...yes, eleven London boroughs plus East Sussex - around 100 libraries in all - have signally failed to come up with Coldheart, Space Age OR Banquo Legacy. If this goes on I may have to resign from the human race in disgust. Or join more libraries. Or *shudder* actually BUY the things. Would you say they were worth £6 each?

tBL is definately worth it, forget about the other two.

Ok, Emily, sod tBL, and the other two. Sod the libraries. Buy this. Buy it now.

(brain implodes)

This is the one that's a direct - and totally unacknowledged - copy of a Lawrence Miles proposal, isn't it? No wonder it's mind-blowing.

Tell, you what, I'll give the libraries three more weeks to come up with the goods, and if they fail...*sigh*...I'll take your advice. It's such a tragedy that I've developed a conscience. When I was younger I'd just read anything I wanted in the bookshop.

Nah, it isn't, don't believe LM, he may write good books, but he is *insane*, with a capital *insane*, as all good geniuses are.

Well, who am I to comment on the insanity or otherwise of God? But LM did say that he would go through this rubbish with a fine-toothed comb and put the results up on the Internet, so we shall see...

OK, so I lied. I just couldn't face buying The Ancestor Cell, because:

a) Lawrence Miles says it's rubbish
b) Every other Who fan I spoke to at this month's Tavern said it's rubbish
c) Some cretin on rec.arts gave such a broad hint as to the *brain imploding spoiler* that they ruined the whole book for me, and
d) Some equally cretinous cretin at the Tavern (Craig Hinton, actually, as I finally worked out through his repeated use of the words 'Crystal' and 'Bucephalus') made doubly sure that I was totally spoilered.

It is rubbish. It's so rubbish it takes a while to realise how rubbish it is- it's mind blowing, but not in a good Lawrence Miles way.

It has it's moments though- it is probably worth a read from a library- it's actually quite fascinating to see how badly they manage to screw things up.

But thank God, the Burning is very good. While Steve Cole managed to destroy all that was good about his era in the space of 240 pages, Justin Richards uses the pages just as effectively, but to set-up a new era. It isn't the best novel in the universe, but it managed to restore my confidence in Doctor Who.

The Ancestor Cell left me thinking 'Why should I care anymore?'. It made the Burning a struggle to get through, I couldn't shake off that feeling. Slowly but surely however, I got more into tB. It left me wanting more.

The first era of the EDAs is dead. It isn't just over, Steve Cole ensured that, it's dead, all the brilliant work gone into creating a new mythology is gone.

But the EDAs are alive, perhaps more so than ever before- Justin Richards has started his era with something new- the Doctor trapped on Earth for a century. This new era has begun with a total redefinition of the Doctor- he has to learn who he is again.

The EDAs are dead. Long live the EDAs!

*Sniffle, sniffle*

I have to admit that I'm not crazy about Justin Richards - not after The Joy Device and certainly not after his 'Neither the Doctor nor the TARDIS are, strictly speaking, necessary' Writers Guide. But if you say The Burning's good then - if and when I ever get my hands on The Ancestor Cell - I'll give The Burning a try before deciding on suicide.

It's not without it's big gaping flaws (hmm- needs an editor there ;-) ), but it does some fairly interesting things. It's not Tears of the Oracle but it's closer to that than say, the Joy Device (which I liked- it was just in the totally wrong place, banged right near the end of an arc that made no sense, and only had a clear picture of where it was going in the first and last books.)

I think the wiping the slate clean aspect was desperately needed in this series. I know a few people think that Interference is the greatest thing since the dawn of time but a LOT of people think that it's unreadable and pretentious. Plus BBC books need the casual reader and you're not going to get that with a book series rapidly vanishing up it's own arc.

So, yeah, I'd have pulled the lever too.

A lot of DWM readers does not equal a LOT of people.

Hear, hear, Edje. And let's face it, not only are DWM readers few in number, they are stark raving mad. (Though there is a possible explanation for Divided Loyalties getting better marks than Interference in that poll. All the 0 out of 10s were declared invalid, on the grounds that 1 was supposed to be the minimum mark...)

I don't happen to think Interference is the greatest thing since the dawn of time (that honour goes to Dead Romance). But I do think Lawrence Miles is the best thing that’s happened to Doctor Who in the last 11 years. Well, OK, the best thing after the telemovie.

If you don’t want books topheavy with Milesian continuity, fair enough. Blame Kate Orman and Jon Blum for Unnatural History. Blame Steve Cole and Peter Anghelides for Ancestor Cell (they meant to wipe him out of space and time, and instead they spent an entire book doing nothing but rummage around with his ideas). But don’t blame Lawrence – Alien Bodies was a wonderful book which stood alone perfectly. It just happened to inject a much-needed bunch of mind-blowing ideas into the series, which quite rightly he expanded on in Interference.

As for Interference being unreadable...have you read Janus Conjunction? Genocide? Dreamstone Moon? Longest Day? Vanderdeken’s Children? THEY are unreadable (except to the insanely dedicated fan like myself). Interference? No way. It pushes its messages a little unsubtly, perhaps, but they are incredibly important messages that badly needed to be said. Yes, the casual reader would probably find it confusing, but at least they'd feel they were glimpsing part of the huge, incredible mythology that Doctor Who has built up over the past 37 years, instead of suffering the usual dreary, mediocre run-arounds that constitute the book range.

Wiping the slate clean - huh. ‘A man is the sum of his memories, and a Time Lord even more so.’ Maybe Justin Richards should have thought about that - it might have saved him from writing The Burning, a s t u p i d tedious waste of space with a barely recognisable Doctor.

As for arcs...what makes you think they’re over? You’ve got the ‘stuck on Earth’ arc for the next few books, and there’s another arc planned after that.

What's the arc planned after stuck on Earth? Is that the Cyberwars thing I heard about?

The other possible explanation is that IIRC Gary Russell counted some of the votes...

The Burning is pretty good though, IMHO. And it was a bloody good idea to wipe the Doctor's memory. I have no doubt that he'll end up with most of it back though.

He'd bloody well BETTER end up with ALL his memory intact! If The Burning had been less thoroughly dreary, I might have put my misgivings aside and welcomed an an amnesiac Doctor, just for a change, but as it is, Justin Richards is in BIG trouble.

Luke, I've no idea what the next arc is about, I just know that Lawrence Miles is having to rewrite his submission for his *starts sobbing with happiness* NEW NOVEL to fit in with it.

It's interesting if you go back to 'I, Who' and read the interviews with all the authors and Pearson asks them what they'd do with the character of the 8th Doctor if they were given the chance, and Richards said that he'd probably 'try to write a story where the Doctor had to find himself'... sound familiar?
I also find it strange that Richards, a man who so forcefully upholds the need for stand-alone adventures over lots and lots of continuity ladden arcs, should want to kick off his reign as editor with just such an arc and is apparently planning more.
Sort of reminds me of how Lance Parkin, someone who tried to fit every Doctor Who story together in a proper historical context in 'A Brief History of the Universe', wrote 'The Infinity Doctors', a story that is near impossible to reconcile with continuity.

Come to think of it, if _I'd_ written the History of the Universe, I too would doubtless have been overwhelmed by the desire to stab continuity to death and then stamp all over its mutilated remains. (Actually I don't find Infinity Doctors too hard to cope with, I just regard it as an alternative universe.)

Tell me more about this Cyberwars thing.

Luke- since when is Caught on Earth continuity laden?

I didn't say it was continuity laden, but it is an arc, and arc's aren't exactly standalone - they rely on the other books in the arc (which is continuity of a kind).
But if Richards is planning another arc (which I have no doubt that he is due to what I've heard) it will most probably make use of some sort of continuity.

Rre: cyberwars - I remember someone posting something about this on the Lawrence Miles mailing list a while back.

Causualties of War does not rely on the Burning.

(For that matter, Interference doesn't rely on Alien Bodies, ditto most of the decent arc books.)

So it doesn't follow on from the Burning? The Doctor is no longer trapped on Earth?

I don't read DWM so I can't comment. Seeing as it's only the same few names that post on here, that sort of makes my point, dontcha think?

The vast majority of readers will be casual readers, the vast majority of people who would watch a new series would be casual viewers who'd tune in once and, if not entertained, switch off. That's why the books should not be arcs.

And, yes, there's plenty of blame to go round.

As for the new eighth doctor books, I've read The Burning, Casualties Of War and The Turing Test and they are stand alone.

Going back a bit, where does it say that a LOT of people are DWM readers. Agreed, the readership is only about 30,000 worldwide but Del didn't say it was DWM readers who didn't like Interference (which I haven't read yet, I'm still getting over The Infinity Doctors).

And Emily: are you saying you kind of know Craig Hinton?

Casualties has the Doctor stranded on Earth. It does not require an understanding of why he is trapped on Earth, which wasn't explained in the Burning anyway- IMHO there's more continuity between tAC and CoW than there is between tB and CoW. Apart from the fact that there is some character development that rewards regular readers, and the fact that tB and CoW are good and tAC is ••••.

A lot of rubbish is talked about arcs confusing new readers anyway. tAC I'm sure would be confusing. That's because it's a bad book, it's continuity laden, with nothing else. AB, Inty, ToP5, Shadows of Avalon- all of them had something new to say, a plot of their own.

The Banquo Legacy contains several references to the arc. Does this mean that it cannot be read without reading the preceding books? No, IMHO.

The books that come closest to actually requiring some previous knowledge are probably ToP5 and tAC. tAC is the worst offender, back references far outweighing anything new.

Arcs done properly should reward regular readers while being accessible. Inty to SoA was to my mind a good example- there was an arc there, but does that mean that you couldn't read P59 without first reading the Blue Angel?

CoE is the same, but more so. 7 novels about the Doctor being trapped on Earth. Not a story in 7 parts about the Doctor being trapped on Earth.

Chris: I was referring to the fact that Inty's reputation as being unpopular comes from the DWM poll. Compare with the online poll, where both books are in the top 5, IIRC.

Del - I agree that the majority of new viewers would be casual, but that doesn't hold true for readers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that most of the human race spends its time slumped in front of the TV, flicking through channels. Reading a book, on the other hand, actually requires some effort and expense, not to mention literacy. How many casual readers would fork out six quid for a Doctor Who book when they had only dim memories of a scarf and a tin dog? You wouldn't catch ME buying a Doctor Who book, and I'm a raving fanatic. And they certainly don't get them out of the library - the average person borrows TWO books a year (philistines). OK, no doubt plenty of non-fans bought The Eight Doctors, given all the massive sales, but it probably succeeded in putting them off for life. Sales of the books are down to about 8 million worldwide.

Edje, I agree about the arcs. The Compassion arc had so little connecting the books that I couldn't work out why it was supposed to be an arc. The Virgin gods one - with the exception of the ghastly TotG - was perfectly accessible. All each book had to do was mention that Benny's home planet Dellah had been taken over by Gods, and voila! Even the most casual reader instantly knew as much about the situation as the devoted Who fan and, indeed, the editor and authors.

Yup, I know Craig Hinton. And Paul Cornell, Dave Stone, Simon Bucher-Jones (I didn't actually SAY anything to him though, the only thing I could think of was 'Why are your books so incredibly boring?' so, with unusual tact, I kept my mouth shut), and, of course, Lawrence Miles. The Tavern is indeed a wondrous place. Anyone coming to London had better make sure they do so on the first Thursday of the month.

I don't think non-fans bought the Eight Doctors- it didn't sell that much (25,000 copies, IIRC). That just put everyone who'd been reading the NAs...

The Virgin Gods arc is... iffy.

WAF, TotG, they're definately part of the same story.

The Stone books seem to be using that story as background, but are telling the story of a completely new character.

The Richards books are standalones, really.

The Miles book is doing something completely different, that only he understands.

So are they giving you tips for your own book proposal, Emily?

Okay Ed, you're big spiel about arcs pretty much says that the past arcs can be read in their individual parts as mostly stand-alones - fair enough. My point was that Richards' whined about arcs and then kicked off his editorship with just such a device. I'm saying arcs s uck or anything, I love them actually (only when down well, as with most things).
I read Dead Romance but none of the other Gods stories, and Dead Romance went down fine (more than fine actually, I even got my dad to read it without telling him it was Doctor Who and he still didn't realise, though he did like the book).
Personally, my favourite arc would have to be the Brotherhood arc from the NAs, even if I haven;t read Sleepy (due to the fact that I can't find it...)

Emily - I read about five books a week (and buy most of them - yes, I've more money than sense) and I tend to dip my toes in the water of each series of tie in novels of the series I like (and I DO like Doctor Who - I taped every episode shown on UK Gold).

Luckily Interference wasn't the first book I read in the Doctor Who range because it would have been the last - not that it's a bad book - but because it's too involved in prior book continuity. I think it's possible to do good Doctor Who with subtle continuity for the afficionado to smile at knowingly and for everyone else to sail blithly past at their disgression.

Of the books from Interference to Ancestor Cell I did like Coldheart and (and I know you don't share this view) The Banquo Legacy. I just shied away from the overt Faction Paradox stuff.

Time to step on people's toes again:
Why are some of you not buying the novels, and showing your support for the series? I doubt the BBC cares if you borrow them from the library; they want to see sales. I've bought every Eighth Doctor book, and most of the First, Third, Fifth, Sxth, and Seventh Doctor books, and while I might regret buying them after finding out it wasn't worth it, at least I can trade them for something else.
Kinda makes me think of the old saying that if you didn't vote in the election, you haven't got the right to complain when things go wrong, so if you're not going to write to the BBC to tell them what you like and dislike, you're going to continue to get books you consider 'rubbish'. You hate a particular author? Tell the BBC to give him the heave-ho. You like an author? BUY HIS BOOK and show it in sales!

How is buying every 8th Doctor book going to show any difference in sales between good and bad authors?

That's why I said to write to the BBC and tell the editor who you dislike and who you want to see more from. I don't know if the editor will care, or if they could turn down an established Who author who submits a manuscript, but at least you'd give them some feedback. Otherwise they'll just do what they want, and hope they get it right. Think of yourselves as the tv audience, and BBC Books as BBC TV; you tape episodes instead of watching them (i.e. reading library copies instead of buying the books), so the ratings are not correct (i.e. sales are not strong) and you don't write to the producer (i.e.the editor), so you get mediocre episode after mediocre episode (i.e. mediocre book after mediocre book). The result is what you now feel is a lacklustre Eighth Doctor range, which just might have been a little better had you given BBC Books an opinion of what's been good and what's been bad.

Cripes, CBC, I'm buying as many as I can! Besides, why buy the books if you DON'T support the series? That is, why buy them if you don't like them. Sure, I'd like to see more Doctor Who stuff, but only GOOD stuff. If they're going to produce junk, why should I or anyone support it.

Obviously, I'm not expecting anyone to just blindly buy the books no matter who is writing them; that's been made abundantly clear to me that some authors are virtually Public Enemy One. I don't believe that every book an author produces is going to be junk. You have to give them a chance, and do it based on your opinion, not on the thoughts of others on this site or somewhere else. Do you really believe movie critics know more than you about your own taste in movies? I don't think so. Until you read any given book, you can't know if it suckss or not.
If you think the BBC is producing garbage, then tell them you're not going to buy it, but you should base that opinion on something you've had first-hand contact with, not hearsay by others.

The BBC may not care whether we're getting them out of libraries, but the libraries certainly do, and if they stopped buying it would make a difference to sales. (And in case you're wondering: yes, sometimes I get Doctor Who books out of libraries when I've already read them and have no intention of doing so again, just to make them look more popular than they really are. I even ordered one once, though as it was Coldheart I've felt guilty ever since, god knows how many library-goers were put off Doctor Who for life when they innocently picked it up off the shelf).

If I was a millionaire I'd buy all the books. And if I wasn't so conscious that there's a Third World out there that needs every penny it can get I'd buy quite a few more (Do you know that it costs £12 to restore sight to a blind person in the Third World with a cataract operation? Have you any idea how painful it is spending money when you've got that emblazoned on your mind every day of your life?) As it is, I bought Dead Romance new (AFTER I'd got it out of the library and discovered how brilliant it is), I'll definitely buy Lawrence's next book (I made the mistake of waiting weeks to get Interference out of the library, whereupon some ******* on rec.arts spoilered it for me) and I seriously considered buying Father Time, though luckily Graham - my Tavern friend who supplies me with Who books free of charge within weeks of publication - arrived in time to save me from temptation.

So - given my pathological hatred of forking out my hard-earned cash - why exactly should I do so for the BBC? It's not as if I owe them anything. Year upon year upon year of paying my licence fee - £100 a time - and what do I get in return? ONE AND A HALF HOURS OF DOCTOR WHO!!!! (Plus a few X-files episodes, which I could watch six months earlier if I could be bothered to tune in to Sky.)

Offering the book editor feedback is a better idea in theory than in practice, I suspect. 'Dear Mr Richards, I really really hate all of Gary Russell's books, and so do all my other Whovian friends who I talk to every day on the Net because I don't have a life, so can you just disregard those elections in DWM which claimed he was quite popular - I bet he rigged them - and give him the heave-ho. Yours sincerely, A Fanwank-Hater.' No? OK, how about 'Dear Mr Richards, Please please please can we have more Lawrence Miles books (regardless of whether he wants to write them or not) because he's a really, really good author, unlike most of the other Doctor Who authors, yourself included, who produce a pile of shite. Yours sincerely, A Devoted Fan.' Hmm...

Actually, I've found critics pretty useful in selecting books and movies. I have to find one who matches my taste, but once I do, it's no problem. For example, Joe Morgenstern of the Wall Street Journal has very similar tastes to mine (except in SF films), and I'm very glad I took his recommendation to see "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" (if you haven't seen it, log off your computer and go see it RIGHT NOW!).

The same holds true for Who books. The reviews at www.gallifreyone.com give me a guideline for purchase. Okay, I'm lying--Emily will tell you what a fool I am for purchasing Who books, since I seem to be intent on owning every title.

Deep down, however, I think this is a bad thing. Not because I regret supporting Who, but because I regret turning SF books into an industry that only publishes TV and film tie-ins. Many years ago (i.e., the 1970's), most SF books were original novels. The only TV tie-ins were the James Blish novelizations of "Star Trek" stories. Now, however, the majority of the books in the SF section are TV tie-ins, or part of fiction series, or reprints of classic SF novels. Very few original SF novels are being published; as soon as one is, the novelist tends to turn to main-stream fiction for his/her next work.

Why did this happen? People like us, that's who (and Star Trek/Star Wars/etc fans). I'm sure that the publishers spend very little money on TV tie-ins, so their profit margin is very high. The writers have short deadlines, so quality is often sacrificed for speed. Sure, some good books get written, but they are the exception.

Wish I spend more time on this topic, but I'm at work now, and I've got to run.

Emily; the BBC (and every other corporation in the world) is in business to make money, and that means they want ten million people to buy their books, and make them very rich and happy. I can't see an executive saying, "Vampire Science' has been borrowed at the library 18 times in 2 months! Great!".
I still say feedback is a necessary element to keep the Powers-That-Be informed as to what we, the consumer, wants. Whether or not we'll get it, nobody can know. But, please, let's not get all sarcastic in such a letter as you improvised, because you're just exagerating a point into a Saturday Night Live skit mentality.
I have bills to pay, I have birthday and Christmas presents to buy, car repairs to fork out my hard-earned money for, but I still find a little room for a one or two books a month. I don't know what you do for a living, but it sounds like the terrible conditions of the Third World might be a part of it. I know all about such places, too, but I can't do a friggin' thing to help the millions of poor people there; that should be something big, greedy corporations and rich countries should do something about. People have been giving money to such charities for as long as I was a little boy, and the Third World is in the same state it was before, so no, my money is staying here with me and my family (I presently have $600 to my name in my bank account). That you have a conscience about the Third World is great and I hope you keep helping people. I'm just not that kind of person.
Mike; consider yourself lucky that you know people that have the same idea of good books and movies that you do. I heard great things about 'Something About Mary' and the 'Interference' two-parter, but came away disappointed, because my hopes had been raised too much.
I find it hard to believe that there's more SF tie-ins than original SF out there, but I'll trust your opinion on that, since you and I don't go to the same book stores, but off hand I'd have thought it was more like a third TV and a two-thirds original SF.

CBC, I think it's up to each person to decide how to spend their money. Doctor Who may be a great program, but it hardly ranks up with sending money to help the poor or needy. I think it's wrong to criticize Emily for deciding not to buy books. Besides, library sales are counted in book sales, and libraries decide which books to buy based on what's checked out.

I'm not the only one who has made the observation about the takeover of TV tie-ins. The great SF writer Frederik Pohl also wrote about this sad state of affairs, and he should know--he's been a writer, agent, and editor of SF for over 60 years. Keep in mind a lot of the original SF is actually reprints of classics by Heinlein, Asimov, and Bradbury. Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that, but it does mean less shelf space for the new authors.

I agree with the letter writing campaign, but you must realize that Emily's not too far off in describing the type of letters written by fans. Their enthusiasm, shall we say, gets the better of them. You should read the letters that were written after Harlan Ellison asked for support of his screenplay for "I, Robot." The nice ones started out "Dear Sh*thead Movie Producer"....

CBC, the message I was trying to get across (unsuccessfully, obviously) is that just the act of putting pen to paper about Doctor Who is enough to get you labelled a sad anorak, never mind what the letter actually SAYS. If it’s encouraging, the editor’ll probably label you a rabid fan who'll buy anything vaguely Who-ish, even if it's got the words 'Christopher Bulis' on the cover (so ignore all comments); if it’s discouraging he’ll probably write you off as a whining lost cause he doesn’t want to pander to (so ignore all comments). If you actually come up with any constructive suggestions he’d like to follow, he wouldn’t dare, for fear that you’ll be encouraged to turn up on his doorstep with your pile of 15 unpublished manuscripts.

Of course, I’m basing this on television executives’ reactions to Who fans’ feedback over the decades, so I’m probably completely wrong. No doubt Justin Richards is a true fan, and let’s just disregard The Burning, not to mention his tendency to write Who books in three weeks flat.

Are you guys trying to tell me that an average Doctor Who fan can't write a civil letter to the BBC?
There's a web-site for Pocket Books, who publish the Star Trek novels (www.startrekbooks.com), and a section where anyone can e-mail an editor and ask about published and soon-to-be published books, and 9 out of 10 can do so without looking like an offensive jerk. Why is this so hard for Who fans to emulate? After all, you're the ones keeping the BBC in business.

I guess not.

*Sigh* Actually I just wasn't bothering to answer because this seems to be degenerating into petty bickering, but if you must know: no, that's not what I'm saying, if you reread my last post I made it quite clear that I was referring to the way the letter would be _received_ by the BBC, regardless of the civility of its contents.

I just finished this one and - for someone who has only read The Fall of Yquatine and The Banquo Legacy as part of the arc before it - I quite enjoyed it.

Thought some of the prose was a little stilted at the start but I once I got into it, I read it fairly quickly (within a few weeks) which is always a good sign, unlike the other half-finished books lying all over my bed.

I especially liked the bit where the Doctor was trying to save the lives at the end, screaming "No" every time the Faction shot someone, saying "What difference will that one life make?" The fact the Doctor saw that even life was one important seemed a very "Doctorish" thing.

Mind you, had trouble picturing McGann as the Doctor. Sometimes it seemed liked Davison or McCoy. And I couldn't get the picture of an older McGann as Grandfather Paradox in my head.

Maybe it's the bad mood I'm in, but I found tAC to be completely incomprehensible. I think my quibble with it and the Faction Paradox war arc is that the problem is basically insoluable. If you're going to have a war between two groups capable of time travelling, then they can always go back and change the outcome. Neither side can ever be completely destroyed unless one or both go back to the beginning of time. At that point, you no longer have a story.

I also can't understand Romana. Okay, I accept that her regeneration may have changed her outlook. But what is her character's motivation? It's sloppy writing that allows the writer to use the regeneration as the excuse and forgo any character development.

If Gallifrey and, by extension, the Eye of Harmony have been destoyed, then what is powering Compassion? She makes a comment that it might cause a problem, then brushes it off in the next sentence.

In many previous Doctor Who stories, we've been exposed to the fact that Time Lords are sensitive to time changes (a few examples--"City of Death", "Invasion of the Dinosaurs", and "Meglos"). So when time changes on Gallifrey, who's the only one that notices? Fitz.

There was one thing I enjoyed about this book (two if you count the return of the original TARDIS)--the 3rd Doctor's history has been restored. I think.

It says a lot about a book if the best thing you can say about it is that it restores Planet of the Spiders. Personally, I'd prefer Interference to PotS any day. Not to mention the fact that Love and War's claim that poor old Pertwee spent ten years dying in agony is also presumably restored.

Well, here in tAC we have the 3rd Doctor surviving in a maddened, disembodied state for a thousand years! I'd still rather have PotS.

Well, after slogging through pages and pages of why one should buy DW books and which authors should be shot on sight, there are finally a few posts about this particular book right here at the end. I guess no one had much of an opinion about it then.

Frankly, I found it nasty: nasty characters, nasty story, and just a nasty tone overall. What happened to Romana that she suddenly hates the Doctor? (let me guess, another book I haven't read) Everyone in this story treats everyone else like the enemy, with the one single slightly-redeeming relationship being between young Fitz and young 8th Doc, and even that's weak because they spend most of the book apart.

And what about the end? Is the Doctor still infected? Mali said she could smell the odor of decay about him, which more or less confirms he was indeed infected in the first place. How is blowing up Gallifrey going to change that? How is it going to make his meeting on Dust with the Faction never happen?

As for Compassion (yet another book I must not have read; when did the TARDIS become a person?), I imagine she gets her power from the Eye of Harmony past. If it exists at any time, can't she tap into it?

Nine Gallifreys? (I know, another book) The Faction Paradox? (was this in the TV series anywhere?) Where was K-9 and Leela? (I suppose Leela's dead by now) Children? (Oh well, never did like the Loom concept anyway)

Perhaps the best, most Doctorish bit in the whole book was dusty #3 showing up to save the day. And, unlike everyone else, he was actually in character!

Well, that's Lungbarrow and Ancestor Cell read. Now on to the final book people keep referencing: Cold Fusion. I can't even remember what I'm reading it for.

Uh-oh. Cold Fusion's the best of the three, but it's not actually very, well, GOOD. Why not read the BEST books (i.e. Dead Romance) instead of the ones that THINK they're the most important? And just ignore any irritating references to them (it's not as if anyone understands what's going on in Lungbarrow and Cold Fusion even AFTER they've read them).

Still, if you want to find out about the Doctor/Romana row and Compassion's transformation, try Shadows of Avalon - it's not bad. And to discover all (well, a bit) about Faction Paradox (no, they were never mentioned on-screen) read Alien Bodies, one of the few myth-creating books that actually manages to be a brilliant read.

'I imagine she gets her power from the Eye of Harmony past. If it exists at any time, can't she tap into it?' Aha! Interesting. You didn't spot that Gallifrey had not merely been blown up but wiped out of existence forever, its past as well as its future. Neither did I. Ancestor Cell is incapable of getting even so basic and important a message as that across. I didn't realise what had happened till Adventuress of Henrietta Street.

Given the survival of the Doctor and Nivet, doesn't that seem to do the Faction's work for them? Not that the Doc doesn't create enough paradoxes all on his own.

Shadows of Avalon and Alien Bodies, eh? Any other recommendations? I actually prefer stories that read more like the on-screen episodes rather than apocryphal revelations which seem to use the characters just because they're convenient.

Ah. You want Festival of Death. Amazingly, it gives you more of Tom Bakery feel than actually watching Tom Baker. And try Vampire Science - it was what made me realise that the books WERE real live Who in their own right (and hence lured me into reading practically every NA, MA, Benny NA, EDA, PDA, etc etc, something for which I've frequently cursed Vampire Science's name). Trouble is, most of the best books just couldn't be done on-screen - I hesitate to use the (deservedly) much-mocked and soon-dropped tagline on the back of the early NAs, but some of them really are too broad and too deep for the small screen. ••••, I know somewhere on this board I listed all the best Who books, I can't remember where, and just at the moment I can't be bothered to do them all again...you could look at the ranking site at:

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sps/rank.html

to find out how other fans have voted on the books, unfortunately they have been known to get things wrong occasionally...

Thanks. I'll give these two a try then.

The blurb's not exactly riveting. 'soon [the Doctor] will learn that nothing is safe and nothing sacred' - hadn't he kinda realised that ALREADY? 'Shot by both sides' - gosh, was he? I honestly don't remember.

'Everything [in the old TARDIS] seemed to be covered with a precisely measured layer of dust' - the hell it did!

'That war TARDIS commander has been sent...to capture us, because she wants to take Compassion back to Gallifrey, my planet of origin, so that my people can use Compassion as the basis for future timeships in their as-yet-unstarted battle with an unnamed future Enemy' the Doctor explains. To FITZ. Worst info-dump EVER.

'I don't believe there can ever be a a necessary evil. Or the lesser of two evils. It's always evil' - look, I know Eight is pretty soft, as Doctors go, but that's ridiculous. He spends his entire LIFE committing the lesser of two evils.

Oh look, Compassion breaks down. AGAIN. (Ah well, at least it's the last time. Till Of the City of the Saved..., anyway.

'Steal back the ship that would sire the first fighting force' - 'sire' is probably the wrong word, here...

'However, a professional career as an internationally famous guitar legend with a rock band who played their instruments with their teeth had rapidly vanished in place of a reluctant vocation as a universally ignored roadie for a Time Lord who saved worlds using string and sealing wax.' - that's actually a rather nice quote. Other than the fact that, far from ignoring him, every woman Fitz Kreiner meets seems to fall in love with him for some inexplicable reason. (At least in THIS book she's only after him for his biodata.)

I realise that the mythos of the Time Lords was blown for good and all the moment they started having names (especially given that said names were Engin, Spandrell, Pandak, Borusa and Goth...GOTH for god's sake) but...ETON? That's just taking the mickey.

Why on Earth does Fitz just assume he's on Earth? There are rather a lot of planets in the universe.

'Vozarti watched the guard take off his jacket and hang it over a chair. He wondered whether Ditrec would be careful not to get the prisoner's blood on his shirt' - wasn't it bad enough that Gallifrey resorted to torture in Deadly Assassin without them actually resorting to messy torture? I thought they had a mind probe these days, anyway...

So the Doc's the 407th and the 409th President of Gallifrey? Does that make any sense, given their ten-million-year history? (Pre-New Who elongation, anyway.) How long did each President LAST, for heaven's sake?

There are billions of dead minds in the Matrix. And yet only the 'great and the good' get in there? (Since when?)

How can the Doctor be stupid enough to let Compassion's location slip?

Why doesn't Romana care that the Doc's being Factionalised?

'The Doctor knew deep in his terrified hearts what the Castellan was going to say next' - what, the DOCTOR is TERRIFIED of going back to that Edifice he survived earlier?

'"Madam President, may I respectfully remind you of our agreement? I was to be allowed to synthesise the essence of the future TARDISes -" "No longer necessary," snapped Romana, her cold tone a stark contrast to the way she had been addressing Samax a moment earlier. "We know where the Type 102 is."' It's never explained WHY Romana's so hell-bent on rape. When that sets both the Doctor and the so-called Type 102 against her, i.e. dooms the entire project. When there's another way. Maybe a skilful enough author could have managed to justify a regenerated, War-Queened Romana being this much of a monster but GOD these authors aren't up to it.

'Since the Dalek incident, things have begun to change here' - my god they're not referring to Apocalypse Element are they? Trying to marry up the books and audios...well they've sure as hell given up on THAT now.

'Every Time Lord knows the Enemy homeworld is called Earth. Some believe it is retribution for the ancient Time Lords standing by and watching as the little world was invaded and devastated time and time again' - uh? Invaded, yes, but devastated, seldom - and the Time Lords EXILED THE DOCTOR THERE to save Earth's skin. Time and time again. And wouldn't a universal Time War be a bit of an over-reaction to a non-intervention policy, anyway?

Half this BOOK is spent on Vozarti obsessing about his newly-regenerated looks. Shouldn't Time Lords be USED to this sort of situation? Get over it already, loser.

Still, they've got to up the page count somehow, I suppose. Given that at the halfway point literally nothing has happened except wandering around the boring Edifice and holding boring voodoo ceremonies.

The Doctor had a canary? Since when?

'"I've never known of such a bond between TARDIS and owner. An empathic interface of this magnitude is unheard of." "We've been through a lot together," the Doctor said, shiftily, as if worried some impropriety was being implied.' - aha! So the new series isn't the only thing thinking along 'Shall I leave you two alone together' lines...

'As a kid, [Fitz]'d dreamed of living to a ripe old age' - what sort of weird kid dreams of THAT?

Why does Compassion let Nivet trap her before rerouting her circuitry? I know she likes him, but there are limits...

'Her people loved her' - WHY, exactly? In MY experience, dictatorships where starving people are gunned down in the main square by the police for stealing a loaf of bread don't tend to be enormously popular.

And GOD does this manage to destroy Gallifrey's few remaining scraps of magic/credibility/specialness/alienness/whatever that miraculously survived Invasion of Time, Arc of Infinity and co. It's just like Earth, but worse. And the pathetic attempts to inject grandeur by going on and on and on and on about how bloody BIG everything is fall REALLY flat. The more I'm told about the Panopticon being so BIG that it has its own weather system, the more I think of that godawful cheap set for Tom's inauguration.

DEATH doesn't formally dissolve a Time Lord Presidency? Why NOT, for god's sake? And how come EVERYONE accepts without batting an eyelid the usurpation of Romana's Presidency by a dead-by-his-own-hand Faction-loving predecessor?

'What student could understand the forgotten technology of the Remote's remembrance tanks' - one who read a book on 'em, presumably. The principle's not that complicated.

'[Romana] even invoked the right of challenge against the incumbent President, Flavia, for the first time in two hundred generations' - right, so you'll steal the NA idea that Romana returned from E-Space to rule Gallifrey, but you won't accept that she WON AN ELECTION to do so...? What the hell did poor Flavia DO that was so ghastly as to justify breaking a two-hundred-generation tradition?

I know these kids are thick, but Kellen sending a message betraying the Faction in front of Kreiner and Tarra is way beyond thick. Frankly getting his neck snapped had a certain Darwinian justice about it.

'[Romana] was the high priestess of consensus politics' - OF COURSE she was! That's why she duelled the existing President, proclaimed herself War Queen, built eight more Gallifreys, and geared all nine planets towards a future War whose timing and Enemy they knew sod-all about. Yeah. That must have been really easy to achieve with consensus politics.

'A walkway of blue copper' - I thought copper was, y'know, COPPER-coloured. Or green when it got rained on. I didn't know copper could be blue. So I'm rather surprised that FITZ does.

'Perhaps he should exercise once in a while' - Fitz - has - spent - YEARS!!!! - as - a - Companion! Which part of OUTRAGEOUS AMOUNTS OF RUNNING has he somehow not noticed?

'We're going to infect you, Madam President, with the same destructive gene that has tainted the Doctor's DNA. Then we'll force-regenerate you until you fall to us. Your people will follow, flocking to us in legions' - yeah, well...judging by the reaction (or lack thereof) to Romana's overthrow, her people wouldn't follow her out of a burning building.

'He had to hold the tears in, though it felt as if he was losing his mind with fear' - oh *sob* poor darling Fitz, I *whimper* can't bear it! Faction Paradox have...tied him to a chair!!! The FIENDS!

The Doctor orders Mali to shoot Greyjan dead. (And no, it's not one of those cunning-double-bluffs of his.) Great, now this book has totally misinterpreted the Doctor's character as well as Fitz's, Gallifrey's, Faction Paradox's, the Time War's, etc etc.

Why, exactly, is Timon so keen on President Greyjan if he hates 'Faction scum' so much he dies defying them?

Why doesn't it occur to Fitz, Romana, the Faction, etc that the Doctor's just FAKING his virus take-over?

But KREINER notices...and covers for him. That's FATHER KREINER whose hatred for the Doctor surpasses all other baddies' hatreds put together. And then he gets shot in the stomach for the Doctor...despite the fact said Doc refuses his one request. (And what on Earth is the POINT of asking the Doc to nip back and not interfere in Fitz's life? It won't wipe out the last few thousand years of misery.)

The Grandfather certainly takes his time about fighting to stop the Doctor pulling that lever. What IS it about the baddies - Rassilon, Davros, the Dalek God-Emperor, etc etc - that makes them more curious about which way the Doc'll jump than keen to keep their entire species alive?

'"Compassion, this will never work. A thousand, a million things could go wrong." "I know." She pursed her lips..."You'll just have to hope for the best."' THAT'S what we get in place of an explanation for the fact the Doctor's two 'friends' are abandoning him, catatonic, in the nineteenth century for over 100 years?

'Fitz felt the ground shift ever so slightly under his feet, the tingling at the back of his neck that told him they'd materialised' - well THAT'S odd cos four pages earlier you claimed that Compassion hiccupped when she materialised.

The universe is free of the threat of the Enemy? How? ALL those tiny pointless pissed-off stupid cells were on Gallifrey when it went boom?

So the Doc's the 407th and the 409th President of Gallifrey? Does that make any sense, given their ten-million-year history?

It implies an average term of just under 25,000 years, suggesting 2000 years to a regeneration. That's not completely impossible - the first regeneration might be the shortest - but it's certainly unexpected. More likely, either there are a lot of presidents who don't get counted, the ones like Morbius, or the Time Lords only started the count in the last million years.

how come EVERYONE accepts without batting an eyelid the usurpation of Romana's Presidency by a dead-by-his-own-hand Faction-loving predecessor?

They're not worried because the Doctor's in town. Gallifrey knows his reputation, so they trust him to fix everything, letting them sit back and marvel at his ingenuity. Unfortunately for them, this time the Doctor can't save the planet.

'A walkway of blue copper' - I thought copper was, y'know, COPPER-coloured. Or green when it got rained on.

Copper sulphate is blue, so wash that walkway down with sulphuric acid and you'd get the effect described.

So the Doc's the 407th and the 409th President of Gallifrey? Does that make any sense, given their ten-million-year history?

It implies an average term of just under 25,000 years, suggesting 2000 years to a regeneration. That's not completely impossible - the first regeneration might be the shortest - but it's certainly unexpected.

'Unexpected' is putting it mildly. Borusa made it obvious that - however determined he was - a President was simply not allowed to serve out all thirteen regenerations in the position anyway. And those old duffers in Deadly Assassin mentioned Presidents 'chopping and changing every couple of centuries' which - combined with the Doctor's extremely short-lived Presidency - suggests most Presidents would have had to have MORE than 25,000 years in power. (I'm sure the Deadly Assassin coffin-dodgers mentioned Pandak the Something-or-other approvingly, I just can't remember how long he lasted. I'm •••• sure it wasn't 25,000 years, though.)

More likely, either there are a lot of presidents who don't get counted, the ones like Morbius

Even Morbius can't be more embarrassing than the Doctor, and they counted HIM. TWICE.

or the Time Lords only started the count in the last million years.

I'd've thought the one thing they'd be good at is keeping accurate records for a lot longer than a million years. Of course, I'd've thought they'd keep accurate records about the black hole under the floorboards, so what do I know.

They're not worried because the Doctor's in town. Gallifrey knows his reputation, so they trust him to fix everything, letting them sit back and marvel at his ingenuity. Unfortunately for them, this time the Doctor can't save the planet.

An excellent explanation, spoilt only slightly by the fact that no one ever DOES sit back and marvel whenever the Doctor is in the house. Hell, even I wouldn't, admittedly because I'd be too busy grovelling at his feet.

Copper sulphate is blue, so wash that walkway down with sulphuric acid and you'd get the effect described.

Ah, thanks. I can just imagine the Time Lords washing their walkways with sulphuric acid, the nutters.

I'd've thought the one thing they'd be good at is keeping accurate records for a lot longer than a million years.

True, but the office of president might only be a million years old. The top Time Lord might have been called the Grand Secretary of the High Council, or similar, until one of them decided President sounded like a better title.

Another option is that for the first nine million years, or however long it was, Rassilon was the eternal President. He may have been sleeping, but trying to claim one of his titles would still take quite a bit of nerve.

Ooh, good ideas! Can anyone remember whether Rassilon was ever described as 'President' in The Five Doctors?

Ooh, good ideas! Can anyone remember whether Rassilon was ever described as 'President' in The Five Doctors?

As far as it can be trusted, Wikipedia says that Rassilon became the first Lord President after he created the Eye of Harmony. So the tittle goes back to the very beginnings of Timelord society. However, that doesn't mean there was an unbroken line of Lord Presidents going from that time to today. There may very well have been long periods when Gallifrey was ruled by dictators, generals, emperors, Prime Ministers and others.

As far as it can be trusted, Wikipedia says that Rassilon became the first Lord President after he created the Eye of Harmony.

I'm not sure I WOULD trust Wikipedia on this issue. It would be so easy and natural to just assume that Rassilon was the President - especially after End of Time where he WAS the President - without it EVER being stated on-screen in Five Docs.

There may very well have been long periods when Gallifrey was ruled by dictators, generals, emperors, Prime Ministers and others.

Ah, but dictators and generals would be unlikely to CALL themselves 'Generalissimo' or whatever instead of President - it would kinda give the game away, whereas if they didn't publicise their ruthless dictatorship, odds are those Gallifreyan cretins would take CENTURIES to notice it. Emperors are pretty much out - if Rassilon or Morbius didn't use such a title, who would be crackpot enough to? And even if Prime Ministers wielded the effective power, there'd doubtless be a presidential head of state as well, to take care of all that ceremonial stuff the Time Lords love so much...

I just rewatched The Five Doctors. Rassilon is not refered to as Lord President at any time. The closest they come to it is calling him Lord Rassilon. He may be referred to as President in other episodes, but rewatching the whole series just for that is not something I'm prepared to do.

I'm not sure I WOULD trust Wikipedia on this issue.

I agree. I'm afraid it will be necessary to actually hear Rassilon called Lord President to confirm this. I believe The Deadly Assasin is the first episode where Rassilon is mentionned. I think I'm going to watch that and report back.

Remember, President just means one who presides, i.e chairman, while Prime Minister means first servant, and Lord originally meant 'keeper of the bread'. The top Time Lord could call themselves by whatever title they likes - humble or grandiose. Before long, it would have acquired the same dignified patina as those three titles, and get translated into English as one of them.

Anyway, even if Rassilon was the first President of the High Council, he could still have held that title for millions of years, despite being sound asleep, simply because no lesser Time Lord had been brave enough to declare him officially dead.

I just rewatched The Five Doctors.

Now THERE'S a dutiful Nitcentraller. A shining example to us all. (You DO realise someone needs someone to watch Edge of Destruction to see if it implied that the Doctor had only recently left Gallifrey, for our Doctors: Hartnell thread...?)

Rassilon is not refered to as Lord President at any time.

HA! I knew it!

(Well, OK, I didn't KNOW it at all, but I had a vague feeling this might be the case...)

The closest they come to it is calling him Lord Rassilon.

That DEFINITELY doesn't imply a President, we get 'Lord Doctor', 'Lord Master', 'Lady Flavia' etc...

He may be referred to as President in other episodes, but rewatching the whole series just for that is not something I'm prepared to do.

Oh c'mon...you KNOW you want to...

I believe The Deadly Assasin is the first episode where Rassilon is mentionned. I think I'm going to watch that and report back.

That would do nicely.

Remember, President just means one who presides, i.e chairman, while Prime Minister means first servant

Maybe in flexible, ever-evolving English they do, but things are set on stone on Gallifrey. (Literally.)

Lord originally meant 'keeper of the bread'.

Seriously? Ha ha ha!

Anyway, even if Rassilon was the first President of the High Council, he could still have held that title for millions of years, despite being sound asleep, simply because no lesser Time Lord had been brave enough to declare him officially dead.

Oh, I dunno. The Doctor held the post of President post- as well as pre-Five Docs (according to Ancestor Cell anyway, which IS what we're supposed to be discussing), i.e. AFTER Rassilon had proven himself to be VERY MUCH ALIVE.

Anyway, they a) overthrew Rassilon and locked him in a Tower, and b) overthrew the Doctor and put him on trial, so frankly the Time Lords don't seem as wary of stripping living legends of their titles as they bloody well SHOULD have been.

Just saw THIS in my review:

The destruction of Gallifrey (even THIS Gallifrey, which has inexplicably discovered the dubious pleasures of sex, children, and capitalism) has ripped out the heart of Doctor Who.

OK, it turns out that destroying Gallifrey definitely does NOT rip the heart out of Who. On the contrary, getting rid of those Time Losers gives Who a new lease of life. It just has to be done in the right WAY. RTG has admitted that the telemovie pretty much gave him a How Not To Do It manual for Who's return, maybe Ancestor Cell did the same thing when it came to the Time War.

I believe The Deadly Assasin is the first episode where Rassilon is mentionned. I think I'm going to watch that and report back.

That would do nicely.

Nope. Rassilon is described as the founder of modern Timelord civilization, an engineer and an architect, but no mention of him being the first Lord President.

You DO realise someone needs someone to watch Edge of Destruction to see if it implied that the Doctor had only recently left Gallifrey, for our Doctors: Hartnell thread...?

Seriously?

Maybe in flexible, ever-evolving English they do, but things are set on stone on Gallifrey. (Literally.)

But even stone can be eroded by the passage of a million years. There have been the occasional references to Old Gallifreyan, indicating that the language has changed.

In principle, it's possible that the office of President on Gallifrey started out as the chair of an advisory council, working for a Prime Minister who was then the head of state 9being First Servant of the people, nominally), but some internal coup shifted power to the presidency, leave the premiership defunct. It's the kind of thing that happens often enough in history.

Seriously? Ha ha ha!

Seriously, as any large enough dictionary will confirm. In those days, back before the Norman's came, handing out the bread was an important job. They could make sure their bootlickers got fresh bread, while the awkward squad got stale crusts.

The Doctor held the post of President post- as well as pre-Five Docs i.e. AFTER Rassilon had proven himself to be VERY MUCH ALIVE.

True, and there doesn't seem to be any evidence Rassilon was the first Lord President anyway. The title might have been invented just 200,000 years before Ancestor Cell, giving an average reign of about 500 years, much more reasonable.

The title might have been invented just 200,000 years before Ancestor Cell

Though the ceremony bestowing the this, that and the other of Rassilon upon the Lord President would make more sense if it dated back to...well...Rassilon.

Don't panic, Francois - this time I'm the one heroically hurling myself on the grenade...I've been meaning to rewatch Invasion of Time for AGES...

RIGHT. Have FINALLY staggered to episode 5 of Invasion of Time and guess what? 'You are the first President since Rassilon to hold the Great Key' Borusa informs the Doc. Ergo, Rassilon WAS President. Can't actually remember why this is significant to our discussion, but what the hell.

'You are the first President since Rassilon to hold the Great Key' Borusa informs the Doc. Ergo, Rassilon WAS President.

Doesn't quite follow. After all, it'd be technically true even if the Doctor was the first ever President of Gallifrey, since then it wouldn't be possible for the non-existent earlier presidents to have held the key.

However, the only sane reason for Borusa to word it this way if Rassilon wasn't president was if he was just being figurative, using 'since Rassilon' in the same way as we might say 'since ancient times'.

Assuming Rassilon was President, that doesn't mean the office existed continuously. Rassilon may have stayed president for a few million years after he first died, like North Korea, or the title may simply have been left vacant.

'And you won't have been disappointed. You may have boggled, blustered, cheered, cried, sworn at the page or danced a jig around your bedroom, but you surely won't have been disappointed.' – DWM editorial on The Ancestor Cell. After similar bare-faced lies about the telemovie I shouldn't be surprised, but, after all, there's some EXCUSE for going crazy over the ONLY NEW WHO WE HAD ON TELEVISION DURING TSLABYOD.

Justin Richards in DWM: 'I wrote a document which said, "We need to resolve the left-over bits from Interference, and it gives us a way of kicking off in a new direction." I was spurred on partly by the interview with Lawrence Miles in DWM - I thought it was ironic how he talked about needing a future mythology, rather than relying on the past all the time. It struck me that the author who raids the past most, even though he subverts it and changes it, is actually Lawrence. Now, the PDAs are great for that - for the the Eighth Doctor range, how do we move on?' - I can't believe he's trying to pin the blame for Ancestor Cell and the subsequent stupid (and never-resolved!) amnesia storyline on LAWRENCE!

Especially given that he ADMITS 'Having to live with - or live up to - what happened in Interference is a real challenge' - in what conceivable way does Ancestor Cell live up to that by attempting to blow it all up? And making up pathetic lies about who the Enemy really is...

'I was subtly able to hark back to Apocalypse in Ancestor Cell, and lay elements of Romana's Cell motivation in Apocalypse. It adds another layer to both' - Steve Cole on writing this AND the Sixth Doctor Dalek-invasion-of-Gallifrey audio The Apocalypse Element. Well, I certainly didn't notice an extra layer. Don't recall Romana's TWENTY YEARS as a Dalek slave in Apocalyspe coming up AT ALL here.

The Reference Guide's Ancestor Cell page:

'It is strongly implied in The Gallifrey Chronicles that Romana and Mali are killed by Faction Paradox skulltroopers' - WHAT! WHERE!

'but for reasons revealed in that novel, that doesn’t necessarily mean they end up dead for good.' - Why SHOULDN'T they end up dead for good? They'd hardly have had time to hook themselves up to the Matrix as they died (unless I missed THAT too).

'"Compassion, this will never work. A thousand, a million things could go wrong." "I know." She pursed her lips..."You'll just have to hope for the best."' THAT'S what we get in place of an explanation for the fact the Doctor's two 'friends' are abandoning him, catatonic, in the nineteenth century for over 100 years?

Aaaand thirty-one books later, when Justin Richards - presumably responsible for this brilliant idea - has had PLENTY of time to work out WHY OH WHY, we get:

'"But there was a terribly good reason for it at the time." [Fitz] frowned. "I think."'

Thanks for nothing.