There’s a reason that more action figures have been made of Leela in her leathers and Peri in her leotard-with-shorts than any other Doctor Who companions. And let’s not get into the recent revelations that Jon Pertwee insisted on a recast of the role of Sarah Jane Smith, because the actress cast before Elisabeth Sladen was too tall, and he liked to perform against a physically small woman, one he could be seen to physically protect. Ahem.

But there’s one sexist trope that, narratively, Doctor Who almost never used, and looking back over some of the rather dodgy decisions made by the show and its almost all-male writing tradition, it’s quite impressive that they didn’t. They almost never killed the girl.

[Spoilers follow for a bunch of Classic & New Who]

To be fair, they almost never killed the Doctor’s companion full stop, and a big part of that was the focus on an audience of children and families rather than adult fans (apart from a brief period in the mid-80′s when the show was retooled for a weekday evening audience instead of the usual Saturday teatime). The score is 27 years, 3 dead companions: two young women (Katarina and Sara Kingdom) from the same serial in the mid-1960′s, neither of which had been around for very long, and one young man in the early 80′s (Adric) who enjoys a similar fan reputation to Jason Todd in the Batman comics. If John Nathan Turner had thought of putting up a hotline for (adult, at least) Doctor Who fans to call in and vote whether Adric bought it, chances are the results would have been the same, if less surprising. There’s a fourth example, from a year or two after Adric, in which the longstanding companion Peri is killed and taken over in a manner similar to the death of Fred in Angel, then killed again, but the story is undercut later when this is revealed to be a trick, and that she really “lived happily ever after” with Brian Blessed, who had been stalking her for the whole serial. A rare example where the death of a female character felt far less sexist and demeaning than the alternative…

Home at last, two years after they left - Barbara and Ian say "close enough!"

Which is the aspect I never quite felt comfortable with, in New Who. I love this show, but I didn’t believe or support the idea that Rose saw nothing but an endless TARDIS journey for the rest of her life, and certainly didn’t think the Doctor should support the idea. I winced at the idea that Sarah Jane, once a very independent character, had been pining over Tom Baker’s teeth and curls so badly that she couldn’t move on with her own life (and a slight rewrite suggesting that the reason she hadn’t married was because finding a partner who GOT the alien travel thing was bloody hard might have made all the difference). I was suspicious at Donna happily proclaiming that *she* would be with the Doctor forever, despite not having Rose’s youth and naivete and romantic attachment to the Doctor as excuses. And look how that turned out…

Only Martha and Jack have really had traditional Doctor Who leaving stories, though with a great deal of emotion wrung out of both – Martha doesn’t just leave to help her family recover from an ordeal and, you know, pass her exams, but because she knows the Doctor will never fancy her. Jack is abandoned casually in a horrible future to deal with his new immortality, and spends centuries waiting to yell at the Doctor and receive some closure (something Susan, Steven and many other companions left in less than happy places never got on screen).

And of course, New Who has killed the girl. There was Astrid Peth, the plucky waitress with her forklift, who killed the bad guy Ellen Ripley style, in a disaster movie style story that led entirely to that moment. There was Adelaide Brooke, the gruff and hard-talking Mars commander, whose suicide at the end of Waters of Mars is utterly baffling, as there’s no possible way it can heal the time line and keep history (that the Doctor damaged by saving her) on track. There’s a big difference between your aunt dying a hero in space and her unexpectedly teleporting in to shoot herself in your front hall, guys! Not a lot of dead “companions,” but 2 in 6 years is a lot more than 3.5 in 27 years.

There’s also a bunch of Moffat-related deaths of almost-companions, such as Madame De Pompadour (rumoured to be making a comeback next season), River Song (whose death is transformed into a virtual reality existence, and who still gets to play in the show after it thanks to time travel) and Rita in season 6, set up to be the best possible Doctor Who companion but died nobly instead. And I wouldn’t argue with anyone who thinks the way Donna was written out is tantamount to fridging, even if it allows for hope that someone in the future will fix her loss of memory. She was certainly sacrificed for the sake of manpain.

So basically, when it comes to bodybag blondes, the new show is far more likely to throw a female character under a bus than the old version. That’s… interesting. It’s not like Classic Who was short on character deaths full stop, there were hundreds and hundreds of on-screen deaths. But even though my personal opinion is that Peri the character was better served by her death as performed than the ‘no it didn’t happen’ scene that removed it, I very much like the fact that Classic Who so rarely killed the companion, and never killed off a female companion who had been with the show for any length of time.

New Who has skirted around it, but they haven’t gone there either: the only “companion deaths” were guest stars who were introduced in the same story where they were killed.

Which is why I am hoping, hoping, hoping, that Amy Pond gets to live. That’s what this comes down to. You may have guessed by the title. I’m worried. Steven Moffat has teased, as he often does, that Amy and Rory will finally be written out in the coming season, and that it’s going to be “heart-breaking.” We know he can’t kill off Rory, because the many deaths of that character became a running joke long ago, and it wouldn’t make people cry so much as roll their eyes and throw things.

Amy Pond, though. They could kill Amy Pond. It would have huge emotional resonance, at the end of her arc. It would be a great moment for Karen Gillan, who has performed the role with an expanding and impressive range, to show off her chops. (All actors love to go out with a bang, just ask Nicola Bryant what she thinks of Peri’s happy ending) It would provoke colossal amounts of manpainy angst in the Doctor.

It would be a huge mistake. And I don’t just say that because I have two young daughters who would be devastated. (My seven-year-old’s Doctor is David Tennant, because she’s into nostalgia – my two-year-old’s Doctor is Amy Pond) I don’t just say it because my teenage self would have been devastated at the loss of such a character, to the point of not being able to go back and enjoy the many highlights of Amy Pond. And I’m not sure how well my adult self would cope either…

It would be a mistake because if this show, which has skirted paternalism and sexism and basically got away with a hell of a lot over the decades, if it went THERE with a character who has had an intense two years of character development and audience attachment, and yes, young girls falling in love with Amy Pond, then it becomes a different show. Throwing the female characters under the space bus might make actresses happy, and those grown ups who like their shows ‘dark,’ but in this case, with a girl we have seen from childhood devote herself to the role of Doctor’s loyal travelling companion and fellow adventurer, it would irretrievably break something in the Doctor himself.

So I’m hoping and trusting. I’ve loved seasons five and six, and I do THINK I trust Moffat with seven. I can trust him as a writer and a showrunner… as LONG as he doesn’t kill Amy Pond. Which goes to show that really, I don’t trust him at all. I almost wish we had RTD back (almost) because we know he wouldn’t sacrifice the possibility that a wildly popular actress like Karen Gillan might pop back from time to time.

This reminds me of A Good Man Goes To War, where I spent the whole episode so stressed about the baby and what might happen to her that I couldn’t enjoy it properly until later, in rewatches, knowing how it would all turn out. Even knowing the outcome wasn’t great was less stressful than not knowing it at all.

I LIKED the way Amy and Rory were written out in The God Complex. I liked what was done with them in The Wedding of River Song. I liked how they came back into the story in the Christmas special, as dear friends that maybe don’t travel with him much any more because they have their own lives. Why can’t they just have that? Why does it have to be heart-breaking? And if Amy and Rory are safe, then how is Moffat going to break our hearts? Are our only choices the death of Amy Pond, or the unwriting of River Song’s timeline to give Amy and Rory their baby back?

When I see creators gleefully talking about how they’re going to make us cry, I do start eyeing the female characters with alarm. Surely making them live and leave the Doctor is more interesting?

Like Seanan McGuire, I’ve broken up with shows. I’ve walked away. And the deaths of women have often soured me on shows that I love. The last season of Battlestar Galactica ruined pretty much the whole show for me, because of its treatment of the human female characters. I never really forgave Star Trek: Next Gen for Tasha Yar, or Angel for Cordelia (though to be fair after the colossal awfulnesses they perpetrated on her character towards the end, death was something of a mercy). I don’t want to feel that way about Doctor Who. I’ve forgiven it for QUITE A LOT ALREADY, THANK YOU.

Sara Kingdom: died saving the Doctor in 1966

And yes, they turned all that on its head very cleverly in season five, with Rory dying repeatedly to serve Amy’s character arc (and she dying only once, to serve her own) and everyone coming out alive at the end. And yes, season six was all about the Doctor dying, with occasional Rory deaths to lighten the mood. But, again, everyone came out alive at the end. None of those fakeout deaths can counterbalance the effect that an actual, real death of a female companion would have on the show.

The trouble with Doctor Who, of course, is that the central character is the Doctor. Despite some fans complaining that the show that came back in 2005 may as well have been called ‘Rose Tyler’ and not ‘Doctor Who’, even with the greater focus on the female companion as point of view character in New Who, the show is ultimately all about the Doctor. Which means that killing off the companions is necessarily going to be more about his story arc than theirs – and if said companions are female then that bodybag blondes (or in this case, redheads) trope is going to rear its ugly head.

It may be possible that Steven Moffat can write a tragic end for Amy Pond that is so thoroughly about her character, and her arc, and her story, that I forgive him for it, and that I prefer it to the alternative.

Is he that good a writer? Maybe he is. But I really don’t want to hear any more gloating about how heartbreaking the story is going to be. My heart is already pretty battered and worn down by the treatment of women in all my other beloved pop culture.

Amy Pond is my daughter’s Doctor. She’s the character that Jem loves most. I don’t want our hearts broken when she leaves! And I don’t think I am going to relax until I know, which way or another, what end will come. So… it’s gonna be a stressful year, then.

You can find David’s report card and Tehani’s report card for this season on their websites.

Tansy’s Season Two Report Card

The Doctor: David Tennant
I do like me a bit of David Tennant, I have to say. The Tenth Doctor is often written quite unevenly, and it feels like we’re supposed to adore him regardless of whether he is behaving badly or being genuinely heroic, or maybe that’s just the actor’s charisma shining through? He did a great job of taking over from Eccleston which was a huge deal only a year into the new show – but I found the relationship with Rose dragged his character close to soppiness on far too many occasions.

The chemistry between the two actors was great, and they could really have done with less overt “romancey” dialogue, because the combination of the two felt like overkill. I liked the Tenth Doctor (and Rose) best in the non lovey-dovey episodes, particularly those with Mickey in the TARDIS (“School Reunion”, “Girl in the Fireplace”, “Rise of the Cybermen/Age of Steel”) and despite the problems with the scripting of that episode, I will always love this Doctor for the scenes in “School Reunion” where he met Sarah Jane Smith again.

This season is not the Tenth Doctor at his best, and I think he took longer to find his feet than the Ninth did, but he had some marvellous moments and it’s no surprise that he was swiftly heralded as one of the most popular and beloved Doctors of all time.

The Companions:
Rose Tyler: Billie Piper
I felt Rose lost her edge in this season, as she became a more worldly traveller and was indulged in her honeymoon relationship with the new, younger, more romantic model of the Doctor. She verged on the smug at times, and while that was obviously set up so that the end of the season would be all the more tragic, I think they could have benefited from a rockier first half to the season and smoother second half – of course, having Mickey did do that to some extent, and when I actually sit down watch all the episodes, there’s a lot less smug than I recall. Amazing the difference that putting “Tooth and Claw” AFTER the Cyberman episodes might have made, though. I don’t think it works to have the Doctor and Rose called on taking their adventures too lightly so early, and for the payoff coming so late in the season – I would have rather seen them take Queen Victoria seriously when she chastised them.

Rose is at her best when she is unsettled and not completely comfortable, plus getting a chance to show off Billie Piper’s great comic timing, so my favourite episodes with her are “School Reunion”, and those where she has to deal with one or both of her parents (or “parents”). She had some important scenes in the silly demon story, and my heart went out to her when she was casually trying to plan for a life without the TARDIS, while it was crystal clear that the Doctor was never going to live in a house with her. The final two parter was a great showcase for both Billie Piper and Rose and I’m glad they gave her such a good, strong story to go out on.

Mickey Smith: Noel Clarke
Far less of a comic relief character in this season, Mickey got a proper arc from zero to hero, which I enjoyed very much. If anything I think we could have done with more Mickey episodes in this season, to keep the Doctor and Rose a bit less coupley. But all the episodes with him in are my highlights – his tin dog speech and banter in “School Reunion” and “The Girl in the Fireplace” were lovely, and we learn so much about him in the Cyberman two parter, as we watch him grow up. And just as I start to wonder if it’s OTHER WRITERS which are making him awesome (only RTD wrote the character in Season One & “The Christmas Invasion”, and all the eps I just cited are written by other writers) Mickey return in the final two parter was worthy of the character, and a fitting farewell.

Recurring Characters:
Jackie Tyler: Camille Coduri
I totally want to count her as a companion. She travelled in the TARDIS! Her performance in “Army of Death” in particular is just spectacular, with some deeply moving scenes showing how much she loves Rose and is worried about what an endless life with the Doctor is going to do to her – far beyond the kind of airs and graces one might acquire from working in a shop! Her wary and then wholehearted reunion with OtherPete is also lovely, and conveyed in just a couple of scenes. I also really like all the humour she carries off in her time as the accidental companion – sitting in the TARDIS and accusing him of kidnap, being passed off as an incredibly aged Rose Tyler in Torchwood, that sort of thing. Plus her turn in “Love and Monsters” is great, I’m so glad they thought to show what it was like for her when Rose wasn’t around.

Pete Tyler: Shaun Dingwall
He’s not our Pete, but the appearances of OtherPete added an interesting dimension to the show (heh, literally) and I like the way he and Jackie were used to ground the alternate Earth. None of his appearances in this season came close to the emotional resonance of “Father’s Day”, but it’s lovely to have him back, and *that* hug with Jackie, plus saving Rose at the end, were lovely hero moments for him.

Though, I have to be honest, it’s a bit patriarchal, that end bit, isn’t it? Would have been nice to have Jackie rescuing Rose at that point … though she would have had to figure out the technology first! Okay, maybe not…

Harriet Jones: Penelope Wilton
I love Prime Minister Harriet all through “The Christmas Invasion”, from her flustered introductions to her cooler, harder decisions. I don’t agree with what she did at the end of the episode myself, but I understand completely why her character (and government) went there, and it’s tragic that the Doctor can’t forgive her for it – obviously he didn’t love her as much as the Brigadier! In any case, building on Harriet’s character is one of the best things about this first Christmas special, and it’s alarming how casually the Doctor chose to destroy the ‘Golden Age’ of her prime ministership. So much for the Web of Time…

Sarah Jane Smith: Elisabeth Sladen (or should she be in Companions??!)
Always a companion. ALWAYS a companion! Sarah’s return is everything I wanted – the sight of her still investigating the weird stuff, just like in the 70s was simply glorious, and there were some wonderful performances from both Lis Sladen and David Tennant in the reunion. I hate hate hate the lines that suggest that she somehow put her life on hold pining after him, and particularly that being wistful about Tom Baker (ick) is the reason she never settled down and had children. A couple of tweaks to show that it was her job and her passion to find out the more alien mysteries of life that filled her life, and the rest of it would have been perfect – because she does have every right to be furious with him about the way he left her, more than nearly all of them. Still, we got her back, and while it wasn’t perfect, her return to the show was one of the most epic achievements of this era. I’m so glad they did it.

And, let’s face it, it wasn’t the first time Elisabeth Sladen had to overcome and transcend some dodgy characterisation in her scripts. I could watch her every day.

What is your favourite episode of this season?
“The Girl in the Fireplace” – hate to be boring or predictable, but it’s a bit good, this one!

Least favourite episode?
“Fear Her” – dull and charmless, and a bit too much of everything that wasn’t great about this season. Again, a really obvious choice, which makes me a little regretful, but I can’t bring myself to view this one as a hidden gem.

Favourite guest performance?
Sophia Myles as Reinette in “The Girl in the Fireplace” – a magical performance in an excellent script.

Describe this season in one word!
Romancey!

Grade: Season 2 is always better than I remember it being, and there are some most excellent highlights, but the fact that I always look back on this series as the least interesting is … hmm. Worth keeping in mind, I guess. B-

The Doctor – David Tennant
Rose Tyler – Billie Piper
Mickey Smith – Noel Clarke
Camille Coduri – Jackie Tyler
Shaun Dingwall – Pete Tyler

TEHANI:
There’s a cluster of Hugo nominees at the beginning of this season (plus we wanted to talk about the Cybermen two-parter), then none until the season finale two-parter (which we’d review anyway), so let’s quickly recap the intervening episodes before we chat about “Army of Ghosts / Doomsday”…

“The Idiot’s Lantern” – another monster of the week episode with not a lot to distinguish it, I didn’t think. I liked the strength of the mother at the end though.

TANSY:
I liked “The Idiot’s Lantern” far more on the recent rewatch than I remembered. The Rose/Doctor vibe was bugging me by this point (oh, the smug, the glee) but I think the story about the family is an important one – and it feels like Gatiss is saying something (or rather, not quite saying something) about growing up different, with indications either that the son might be gay and/or that his father might suspect he is. I liked Ten’s interactions with the boy, which made me wistful for a solo male companion, something he never got! (well, apart from [SPOILER REDACTED])

TEHANI:
“The Impossible Planet” (concluded in “The Satan Pit”) – a lot creepier than we’ve really seen so far I reckon. We meet the Ood (remember them, David). I really liked the first of this two-parter, it’s nicely scary and science fictional, but the second part went to dumb places, I thought.

TANSY:
A solid piece of space opera science fiction, and it’s always a relief when they finally get the TARDIS away from Earth for a change, but I agree the second part was problematic. Once you bring the Devil into your science fiction, the shark has well and truly been jumped. I liked the crew a lot, though.

DAVID:
This is very much a tale of two parts, isn’t it? On one hand you have an atmospheric piece of space horror that works very well. The claustrophobic feel, all the cramped passageways and mysterious occurrences, is reminiscent of Alien or, funnily enough, of one of my all time favourite computer games, Doom (I swear they were using one of the sound effects – I had flashbacks to my teenage years and all the hours I spent playing it!). The crew are nicely fleshed out characters, we like them enough to care about what happens to them but there is also a bit of moral ambiguity with their casual acceptance of the Ood as a race fit only for service. The feeling of foreboding escalates nicely, building into a mounting sense of horror.

But, I can’t help but feel that the writers overreached themselves with the religious element and fell short. Some of the best science fiction I have encountered are stories that explore spirituality, after all, it is a big part of the human condition and therefore a worthwhile theme. But if you are going to do so you have to do it better than this, it’s clumsy to say the least. It’s also very much at odds with the existing mythos of the established Whoniverse.

Aside from the fact we have had come across creatures mooted as inspirations for the Devil before (Sutekh, the Daemons), the Doctor has encountered lots of beings with origins outside or before the Universe. Why would one more rock his belief system so violently? Obviously, if you are going to watch a show like Doctor Who you need to be able to suspend you disbelief a little, but I like internal consistency, too.

The discussions about faith and belief left me wincing a little. It’s not the fact that I am religious, it’s just that I have seen this sort of thing done before and in a much more sophisticated fashion – it was pretty average writing in parts (and we see this with some of the non religious scenes too, the writer doesn’t really do subtle emotional moments, but piles it on). I can’t help but think that they would have been better off making the Beast simple an ancient evil that can tap into race memory or archetypes, rather than leaning so heavily towards it being the actual Devil.

Still, I really enjoyed about eighty percent of this episode, so I will give it a pass!

TEHANI
When I first watched the end of this one, I thought the “her” the Doctor was talking about was clearly Rose. Second time round? Not so sure – could it have been the TARDIS?

TANSY
Well, we all know the TARDIS is his true love!

“Love and Monsters” – this one is a hugely divisive episode, a love it or hate it for many fans. It’s also the first of the ‘Doctor-lite’ stories which would become an annual tradition, made necessary by the gruelling film schedule. I like a lot of it – I would watch Marc Warren in anything, and his charisma pretty much carries the whole thing.

TEHANI:
The style is unusual – sort of Blair Witch-ish. It’s a bit silly in places, but that’s reflective of the style and the characters I think – it pretty much worked for me. And of course there’s Shirley Henderson, who is memorable as Moaning Myrtle in the Harry Potter films! And Jackie is awesome, which is nice after the “other-Jackie” in the Cyberman episodes.

DAVID:
While some of this didn’t quite hit the mark (Bit too silly in parts for my taste -the corridor scene was a bit Stooge-ish, the monster a bit too Austin Powers – get in my belly!), you can put me in the “love it” camp. It is always great to see then try something a little different, it’s a risk but it injects a touch of freshness. Elton is obviously the star of this, and the performance by Marc Warren is enough to cover a multitude of sins (and hasn’t this season had some strong guest appearances?!). I have to admit, by the end of the episode I was a bit depressed at all the things he had been through and it was nice that there was a happyish ending for him and Ursula (note I say “happyish”).

TANSY:
I do love Marc Warren, and they were clever to get in such a charismatic character to take the lead in this episode. Love and Monsters also gives us a fascinating insight into Jackie when Rose and the Doctor aren’t around, and I’m really glad they addressed her vulnerability and sadness without bringing emotional blackmail into it. How wonderful when Rose smacked him for upsetting her Mum! Sweet in parts, but I disliked all the gross out bits of this episode, which let it down.

TEHANI:
It’s got that darkness at the end, when Elton muses on how touching the life of the Doctor can destroy goodness. Right before he credits the Doctor with the hopeful part of Ursula’s “sort-of” existence (a bit icky, really).

DAVID:
I think anyone who has been a member of a small group of any sort can identify with LINDA and the way that often the original purpose becomes almost secondary to the social bonding and how one difficult personality can have such an impact on a group like that. There were lots of fun, sweet moments that I enjoyed about LINDA, which made some of the darker moments even more affecting.

I agree completely about how interesting it is seeing Jackie without Rose and the Doctor around, and it gives us an idea of the price she pays for being left behind (an idea that they have explored in a number of ways, and with a number of people, this season). While on a superficial level they seem to be playing her semi seduction of Elton for laughs, it is actually showing how desperately lonely she is, and how abandoned she feels. That’s a powerful scene between her and Elton at the end.

I also like seeing how the impact of the Doctor’s interventions doesn’t finish when the TARDIS dematerialises, and the effect he has on the lives of those who, as Elton says, touch him even briefly. And it makes sense that people would notice the Doctor cropping up at the scene of so many events, reminded me a little of Clive in “Rose”, actually. So, certainly not the weakest episode of the season. This season has actually me a much greater appreciation of Jackie, both the character and the actress.

TANSY:
One of the elements I really like about the RTD era of Doctor Who is the acknowledgement of the consequences and personal fallout of all these Earthbound adventures and invasions – something rarely done in the old days apart from by some of the professionals in UNIT in the early 70’s.

“Fear Her” – ughhh. So very ordinary, one suburban horror too many for the season, and some really dodgy bits. It amuses me that there is a campaign to get David Tennant to light the 2012 Olympic torch, but otherwise supremely forgettable.

So … the main event! I have always had a soft spot for “Army of Ghosts/Doomsday” and felt it was the most effective of all the finales of the RTD era (edging out the Eccleston “Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways”) but was surprised on this recent rewatch just how much I liked it.

TEHANI:
I liked the juxtaposition of the “ghosts” scenes interspersed with the Torchwood scenes, cutting back and forth. We still don’t know exactly what is going on, but we know more than the Doctor does, for a while at least!

TANSY:
The Doctor seems to have a renewed energy here, inventing new catchphrases, romping around in 3D glasses and breaking windows for the sheer hell of it.

DAVID:
I thought the 3D glasses were a very nice touch, a bit of a throwback to Classic Who, with things like a bag of jellybeans or a stick of celery being half affectation, half way of saving the world.

TEHANI:
This is one of the things about watching New Who back to front – I started with Matt Smith, and thus adore him as the Doctor. However, someone (I think Helen, or possibly Terri!) once told me that they thought Smith was riffing far to heavily on Tennant’s Doctor, which I pooh-poohed at the time, but the more of the Tennant era you watch, the more you realise that that is, to a point, true. Smith does, I think, still bring his own stuff to his incarnation, but yes, there is some hangover from Tennant’s take on the role. And in turn, that’s a carry over from every other incarnation!

TANSY:
Hmm I don’t think I would say that at all – I think the two of them are very different Doctors, and it’s easier for me to spot the influence of Classic Doctors like Baker and Troughton in Matt Smith’s performance – though of course, Tennant is likewise influenced by the old gang. They are making some very different choices about Eleven which we will talk about WHEN WE GET THERE, TEHANI, but I’ll agree there is a similar manic energy through all three modern Doctors. Let’s mooooove on.

The plot itself of this particular story is something I really enjoy – the collision of alien drama with kitchen sink ordinariness. I thought the reveal about the ghosts and the way everyone has just adapted to this new thing while the Doctor and Rose were away works very well, and as with “Aliens of London” I really like the use of flipping TV channels to show how pop culture is soaking up the weird. The bit with Barbara Windsor bitching out the supposed ghost of Dirty Den in EastEnders will always be dear to me.

This whole idea of humanity coming to terms with aliens on the 6 o’clock news is a story I love and that they told very well on several occasions in this era – I only regret that they didn’t take it further rather than pulling back each time and pretending that it was mass hallucination or whatever. Eccleston’s glee about this being the day humans met the universe back in “Aliens of London” was infectious, and I always wanted to see that version of the world developed – but of course there are problems with that too, and the show runs into them at various times (something to look forward to, David!) and they eventually unravelled the idea altogether.

Both Torchwood and The Sarah Jane Adventures, which are set in more consistent timelines, address the societal implications of semi-regular alien invasions, but Doctor Who was far more uneven in this, constantly raising and then dashing my hopes that they would do it properly.

Still, this is my favourite invasion of Earth since the Dalek one back in 1965!

DAVID:
This is a really strong finish to the Season, and tied up a lot of the arcs we had seen in a rather satisfying fashion. The initial setup didn’t really grab me as I wasn’t sure where they were going with the whole ghosts thing. The idea of the psychic link and people projecting their memories on the ghosts was clever, but they seemed to just drop that and not mention it again. But, the fact we had Cybermen AND Daleks meant that I really didn’t care, I just caught up in what I found to be a very satisfying combination. You really haven’t lived until you have heard a Cyberman and Dalek trying to talk smack to each other.

TANSY:
It’s publicity gold, of course! Cybermen versus Daleks, one of those genius moves that you can’t believe was never done in the classic years.

DAVID:
Lots of character moments that worked really well for me. Rather surprisingly, I thought, one of the deepest comments came from Jackie when she is warning Rose about losing her identity in her relationship with the Doctor. Pretty spot on, as the Doctor is such a strong, charismatic personality and you can really see that as a distinct possibility. It may sound cruel, but their goodbye was probably for the best as you would think that, especially after the discussion with Sarah Jane earlier in the season, that the inevitable result of them continuing to journey together would have been heartbreak for Rose and at least this way they part on a good note. It was a really powerful moment, and I really felt for her.

TANSY:
The best thing about that Jackie conversation is that it could be any woman warning her teenage daughter about the dangers of losing her identity with her strong personality older man boyfriend. It reminds me as well of a brilliant short story by Karen Joy Fowler (in the Subterranean YA issue in 2011) called “Younger Women” which is from the point of view of a woman whose daughter is a vampire.

I am certainly uncomfortable with the idea of the game plan being to travel with the Doctor FOREVER, considering how young Rose is, and I think it’s to the show’s credit that they don’t make Jackie a bitch for introducing the seeds of doubt, they show her as a deeply sympathetic character, as compared to in “Rose” where she thought her daughter had acquired “airs and graces” merely from working in a shop. She has acclimatised to this older, more confident and happy Rose, but that doesn’t mean she’s not still worried about her.

TEHANI:
Now you both know I’m not a huge Rose fan, and rewatching this helped remind me of why – she’s so YOUNG! A teenager still, and young enough to think that this wonderful, mercurial, incredible older man is the only person she will and could ever love. Okay, so he IS the Doctor, and thus pretty amazing, but gah, nineteen year olds! It actually bothered me a bit, particularly second time around, her age, and is perhaps one reason I adored Donna, in later seasons No spoilers David!

TANSY:
So very young, yes.

DAVID:
I’m not a huge fan of parallel universe storylines but they made it work in this finale. I was a bit shocked by Pete’s coldness to begin with and, as in the “Age of Steel” episode, we were reminded that he isn’t the same Pete that we loved from “Father’s Day”. However, by the end we see that their essential nature is the same and there were some lovely moments with Jackie, and I absolutely loved it when he saves Rose. Almost got a little teary! I love the “new” Mickey, too, saying goodbye to Rose was probably the best thing that could have happened to him and he comes across as a much more centred person, and while he obviously still cares for her a great deal he isn’t defined by his dependence on her the way he had been earlier.

TEHANI:
I *did* get teary. A lot, through the final episode. I didn’t the first time around, but I think there’s a resonance that comes with knowing what’s ahead that makes many of these final scenes even more poignant.

TANSY:
I agree that Pete feels cold and that’s a shock, but utterly realistic and follows on from the end of Age of Steel where he dealt badly with realising who Rose was (as compared to our world Pete, who dealt with it AWESOMELY when he realised his baby girl had turned into a glamorous teenage traveller, I think I would have freaked out more). The scene where he and Jackie reunite is gorgeous, so rich with emotion and restraint and awesome comic timing.

Mickey’s character arc has also been a great thing about these first two seasons – they could have so easily kept him as the rubbish comic relief character, but he’s all badass and grown up now. I’m glad that he and Rose still love each other as friends. And oh, that scene where he turns up unexpectedly is a brilliant surprise – where we just see the back of his head as a random Torchwood scientist and then hear his voice and he turns around, and Rose’s reaction! That absolutely made my love the episode, far more than the crazy big gun or the arrival of the Daleks at the end, though they were both also very cute.

DAVID:
Character stuff aside, the story itself is pretty strong too. After a little bit of a slow start it really gets moving and there is a lot to like. However, I found the Torchwood stuff a little over the top, and I’m not sure that there has been a convincing “conservative” character in New Who yet. The director is too much of a caricature to really impress me, and they didn’t seem to trying to really push the serious aspect of Torchwood that much, I can only assume that changes in the spin off series.

TEHANI:
I think I disagree to a point – certainly in the beginning the director was over the top, but I think as she realised she really was in over her head, she demonstrated strong character, in the face of danger and her own culpability and fear. And I loved her final scene – very appropriate.

TANSY:
Is she Conservative? I would have thought New Labour (grins). I wasn’t keen on her on my first watch but appreciate her more as a character now – I’ve got to the point where I rather like someone (especially a female someone) getting one over on the Doctor, and I enjoy him being out of his depth when he’s first introduced to Torchwood. I also felt her exit (Queen and Country!) was appropriate to her character. There’s a lot of grisly deaths in this one!

As for Torchwood the series, well, you’ll have to see for yourselves just how serious it is. (snerks)

DAVID:
Oh, I meant conservative with a small “c”, rather than the party, but fair point.

I really liked the character of Dr Singh, and I thought both his and the director’s deaths had a nice degree of pathos (as you say, her death was very appropriate, and there was something rather noble about the way her sense of duty proved more powerful than the Cyber conditioning). There were actually a few *very* dark scenes scattered through these two episodes, I thought the part where the two lovebirds are walking through the plastic sheeting was suitably ominous, the Doctor apologising to the Cyber victims sad and chilling, and the bit where one of their brains gets pulled out pretty repulsive!

TEHANI:
I really liked Dr Singh too – in fact there were some very good secondary characters here, in minor roles. Some you might see again, but perhaps we won’t talk about that here…

DAVID:
As Tansy said, the Cyberman/Dalek combo is a surefire winner and really leaves you wondering why we haven’t seen it before. As much as I prefer the Mondasian Cybermen, the parallel earth aspect of these ones has been utilised really well, I liked the idea of them latching onto the void ship to cross universes and I loved the the freedom fighters from Pete’s world following them, taking the battle to them. It reminded me a little of “Day of the Daleks”, actually.

TEHANI:
See this is where my status as newbie fan shows – I’ve not seen any other versions of the Cybermen so had assumed the way they were presented in this season was just revisiting where they came from (ie: Earth science created, not alien), and I thought Daleks and Cyberman, as regular arch enemies, would surely have teamed up before! As you know, I’m not really a fan of Cybermen, but I did enjoy this.

TANSY:
I think that while “The Rise of the Cybermen/Age of Steel” two parter had some flaws, the follow up in this story works very well and makes that story retroactively a whole lot more interesting and important. The comparison to “Day of the Daleks” is very apt – might have to put that one on our shortlist to show Tehani when we’re done with the new lot!

DAVID:
Speaking of the Daleks, I really enjoyed the Time War references and the concept of them using Time Lord technology they didn’t really understand. I’m very excited about seeing where the Cult of Skaro stuff goes (I have managed to avoid spoilers to a large extent, though I have an idea it’s not the last I will see of them!). Watching this and reading some of the Dalek novelisations, I was actually thinking about how the rich history of the Daleks using time travel in Classic Who and the resulting skirmishes with the Time Lords makes a full scale, apocalyptic conflict eminently logical, and of course their use of time travel goes a long way to explaining their extremely convoluted timeline!

TANSY:
Anything I say in response to this would be far too spoilery. We shall resume this conversation at a later date!

Now is the time to confess that, having rewatched most of this and the previous series with my six year old daughter, I was distracted with other tasks, and left her to watch the last episode on her own while I did things in the other room. BIG MISTAKE. I came back in to find her sobbing her little heart out over the Doctor and Rose being separated. I had forgotten what an emotional end it was, and felt soooo guilty. She loves Rose so much.

Later I did rewatch it myself, of course, for blogging purposes. As David said earlier, I like the way that Pete rescues Rose, it makes sense she wouldn’t choose to leave the Doctor, but it’s pretty clear that this is the choice that the Doctor would have made for her, if he was in charge (which he usually is). However chuffed he looked that she chose to stay on his side, it was a deeply uncomfortable choice for her to have made, and a lot of pressure on the relationship (which I still believe, for all David Tennant’s sad face, has always been more important to her than to him).

TEHANI:
I’d forgotten that the Doctor cried! It was much sadder this time around. His reaction to Rose leaving/staying/leaving was odd though – caught up in the emotion of the episode, it all seemed appropriate, but in the cold light of day, it is more problematic, as you say Tansy. After all, he KNOWS that companions always leave, and no matter what his feelings (whatever they are), he KNOWS it’s not going to be FOREVER. He’s so delighted she’s back, despite what he’s just said, and then so sad (apparently) when she’s gone again (despite his pragmatic approach to getting rid of her earlier). I was pleased that Rose took matters into her own hands and defied them all to come back (particularly after the cavalier way Pete and the Doctor conspired to take her away), even if it was pointless in the end.

TANSY:
So how do you both feel about the ending? Sad to see Rose go? And what’s this bride in the TARDIS business all about?

TEHANI:
Tansy, that’s an unfair question! So. Much. I. Can’t. Say!!! I was not sad to see Rose go – I’ll acknowledge it was sad, particularly first time around, because I’ve never loved her, but, as with any companion leaving I guess, it’s always a bit emotional. Not sad. No. Emotional – there’s a difference! Can we come back to discuss this later. Much later…

DAVID:
I found the farewell scene between Rose and the Doctor very moving, and handled powerfully, so it isn’t as if I wasn’t sad to see Rose go, but I can’t help but thinking that it was time. I’d been really impressed with the character development we had seen over the course of the two seasons, and even more impressed with Billie Piper’s acting. I have to admit, at the start all I knew of her was that she was some sort of teen pop star and I assumed that she had been cast as some sort of attempt to capture the youth demographic, to make the New Who a bit more relevant. I wasn’t expecting a huge amount from her, but she put in some incredible performances, and proved me completely wrong.

TEHANI:
And here I’ll acknowledge that yes, she did grow on me, and by the time I’d rewatched I didn’t mind her at all – but she’ll never be my favourite.

DAVID:
But, I am not sure where there was for the character to go. There is something almost cruel about the idea of Rose tagging along with the Doctor forever, infatuated with someone I don’t think was ever going to give her what she wanted, getting older and losing more of herself each day. There was also a real risk of the dynamic of the show getting stagnant and something had to change to bring a bit of fresh air. And, of course, there is only so much URST you can have in a TV show before something has to happen, so the conservative Classic Who fan in me was a little relieved that this was the change they went for!

TANSY:
I’ll always have a soft spot for Rose because of the context in which she arrived – that first season was such a revelation, coming out of nowhere, of my old favourite show revamped for a new generation. I very much preferred her in Season One than Season Two, though, mainly because the rather soppy honeymoon element between her and David Tennant’s Doctor was less appealing to me than the restraint in dealing with the tensions between her character and the older Eccleston model. I always enjoy Season 2 more than I remember, but I do think they could have benefited from putting more strain between Rose and the Doctor, and perhaps taking longer for her to trust and love him so wholeheartedly. I certainly think it was time to move on, and it was for the best for both characters to make a break at this point – it’s a very powerful final moment, and I am glad they didn’t kill her off the way they implied at the beginning of this episode.

DAVID:
As for the bride in the TARDIS? I have no idea! I am sure that the Christmas special will be very illuminating.

TEHANI:
Indeed! Shall we away?

======
Watching New Who – in conversation with David McDonald, Tansy Rayner Roberts and Tehani Wessely

David is coming to New Who for the first time, having loved Classic Who as a kid. Tehani is a recent convert, and ploughed through Seasons 1 to 6 (so far) in just a few weeks after becoming addicted thanks to Matt Smith – she’s rewatching to keep up with David! Tansy is the expert in the team, with a history in Doctor Who fandom that goes WAY back, and a passion for Doctor Who that inspires us all (plus a six-year-old daughter who is finding her own Doctors for the first time). We’re going to work our way through New Who, using season openers and closers, and Hugo shortlisted episodes, as our blogging points. Just for fun! We have already talked about:

“Rose”, S01E01
“Dalek”, S01E06
“Father’s Day, S01E08
“The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances”, S01E09/10
“Bad Wolf/The Parting of the Ways”, S01E12/13
Season One Report Card – David, Tansy, Tehani

“The Christmas Invasion,” 2005 Christmas special
“New Earth”, S02E01
“School Reunion,” S02E03
“The Girl in the Fireplace”, S02E04
“Rise of the Cybermen/Age of Steel”, S02E05/06

This is basically cake (two packet mixes swirled together so some is vanilla & some choc), cut to size & liberally spread with chocolate frosting. The windows and panel are made from roll-out white icing, the details from slices of a metre-long liquorice strap, and the fancy white writing parts from one of those squeezy writing icing things. All bought from the supermarket.

I had a near-disaster when I put gladwrap over the whole thing (having refrigerated the cake for some time I assumed all the icing was set – the frosting WAS but the writing sadly got smeared all over the place) so I recovered by putting a whole piece of liquorice strap over the mess, tidying up with a bit of spare chocolate frosting (always save the last spoonful just in case!!!) and re-writing the text.

It looks like a TARDIS, anyway! Imperfect, but delicious.

[and if anyone, not looking at anyone in particular, hon, thinks I was overreaching myself, I show further evidence that my goals in cakeitude are sensible, rational and achievable, unlike some people who take TARDIS-related cake art to EXTREMES - thanks to @greenspyders for the link]

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that this is Raeli’s second cake of the birthday season – I also made a gluten-and-dairy-free Time Vortex icecream cake for our weekly friends dinner last night, which consisted of mango and lemon sorbet swirled and refrozen in a silicon cake mould, with lolly dinosaurs, musk sticks and not-Lego Daleks stuck every which way into the swirl.

Imagine the kids faces (five of them) when I said “Every kid gets a Dalek.” The birthday girl was magnanimous in the sharing of mechanical monsters, and all 5 children (including the 2 year old Jem) played happily with them afterwards. No one tried to eat one. Happy ending!

Malinda Lo riffs off a Kate Elliott post, talking about being a woman writer and still having to actively check your manuscripts to make sure the female characters are not being screwed over. I do this too! Did I accidentally kill off all the women in my book? Oh, crap. Rewrite!

NK Jemisin talks about why her editor, Devi Pillai of Orbit Books, should be considered for the Hugo race – she had me at ‘Paradol Protectorate’!

A lovely article about cosplaying the TARDIS, bringing steampunk into her design, and just how female the TARDIS is anyway. The cosplay/crossplay phenomenon as a feminist statement is something I never fail to find interesting, and the fannish craft evident in this post is awesome. I say this as someone who is planning to make two birthday cakes next week – a TARDIS and a Time Vortex.

Speaking of which, 3D TARDIS cookies are the best use I can think of for 3D printers…

The Guardian looks at the outpourings of mancrush inspired by the return of Thierry Henry to the Arsenal and questions why football is so institutionally anti-gay when, quite frankly, even the straightest of fannish football blokes are set all aflutter by certain men in certain shorts, scoring certain goals. It’s actually a slightly more serious article than I suggest here, and worth reading.

Some more criticism of Lego Friends (AKA Lego for girls) – in the Australian as well as over on the Mary Sue. Both articles are worth looking at for the extra dimension they add to this story – it really isn’t as simple as ‘Lego researched the hell out of this and gave girls exactly what they want’.

Sarah Rees Brennan answers a question about the current popularity of love triangles with – what else? A historical overview of love triangles.

Meanwhile Karen Healey takes on the popularity of the bromance and asks why the female equivalent (SROMANCE!) is so rare. Also she convinces me that I personally need to watch Josie and the Pussycats.

An interview with the new producer of Doctor Who, Caroline Skinner, with particular focus on her other hit TV show, ghost story The Fades.

Lee Battersby on his recent sale to Angry Robot, and the long road to get there.

The Boxcutters crew are trying to crowdsource a trip to the SXSW Interactive festival in Austin, Texas.

A post about why it is that celebrities fit their jeans better than anyone else – and no, it actually isn’t about being a size zero…

Hoyden talk about the myth of the bra-burning feminists, an idea which has been used to try to make women look stupid for decades, and how the false story was spread.

The Moffat’s Women series continues on Tor, with a comparison between the main female character in this Christmas special and last year’s. I find it very interesting how quickly people have leaped to criticise Moffat for writing a story in which the mother is the hero, so this article made me happy.

Sarah Rees Brennan’s response to the post we linked to in Galactic Suburbia about the wealth of positive girl heroes in YA right now.

One that I meant us to discuss on GS but forgot at the last minute (sorry, Sean!) – Sean the Blogonaut surveys his reading after a year of trying to change his reading habits, genderwise.

Linda Nagata talks about her rationale for self publishing rather than going back to big publishers.

The ever awesome Mary Beard comments on the latest salacious media drama about Ancient Romans and brothels. Yes, really. As ever, her pragmatism wins the day.

Alison Bechdel’s new book is to have an opening print run of 100,000 copies and a massive publishing/publicity campaign when it’s published in May, which is extraordinarily good news. It’s a comic book about a lesbian and her relationship with her mother, people!!! In all seriousness, Bechdel is an extraordinary writer-artist, and Fun Home was a brilliant, fascinating memoir about her father and herself. The only flaw in it was the almost-invisibility of her mother as a character, which was why I (and I imagine, 100,000 other people) was so keen to hear she was working on a sequel about their relationship. To see an LGBTQ title getting such mass promotion and support is excellent, because it is a book which should absolutely transcend any idea of a niche market.

And it gives you all five months to read Fun Home while you’re waiting!

I was interested in this article about how DC Comics have beat the pants off Marvel with their New 52 and then kind of horribly fascinated at how little information the article actually has. It entirely focuses on the print sales, mentioning the whole e-sales and day and date matters as some kind of quirky twist on the tale, but not actually citing those RATHER MORE INTERESTING statistics.

I continue to be annoyed that this entirely dull and by the numbers rendition of Justice League is in their top three sellers. Thereby proving, sadly, all over again, that comics readers don’t care about women. BAH I SAY. Still, could be worse. It could be Red Hood and the Outlaws.

Over at Last Short Story, we’ve been posting our lists of best short stories for 2011. You can read about the opinions of Sarah, Mondy, me, Alisa and Alex.

Sarah Rees Brennan has written a marvellous, loving parody of Jane Eyre, Or: The Bride of Edward ‘Crazypants’ Rochester and it turns out that she loves Press Gang, too! I knew our tastes were eternally intertwined. I’m so looking forward to both of Sarah’s new novels, to be released this year.

On a more serious note, Alisa wrote about her response to the Lovecraft-representing-World-Fantasy discussion, as a Jewish woman who recently won a World Fantasy Award and only learned about Lovecraft’s racism and anti-semitism recently.

UPDATE: Excellent, crunchy post about the awards system by the ever-sharp Ursula K Le Guin.

And yes, that’s basically it. Onwards to 2012! May there be linking frenzies, flamewars and feminist rage, as well as adorable music vids. That is what the internet is for, after all.

A home-made Adipose from Glammer to Raeli

And home-made cybermats!

I could say that we didn’t give Jemima the pirate hat because of Amy Pond… but it would be a lie.

Shortbread daleks! All now eaten.

And… well, yes. A fraction of the Doctor Whoness that invaded our household this year, as every member of the family received something along those lines. Things. Somethings. Many things.

This is not all the things.

I regret nothing.

“Parents from around the UK said the ‘damage had already been done’ and that they had been forced to come up with ‘all kinds of explanations’ about why there was a human inside a Womble.”

HOW MANY KINDS OF EXPLANATION ARE THERE?

Elsewhere in the world, Aqueduct Press continue their marvellous blog series of posts about the Best Reading, Listening, Viewing, etc. in 2011. I like especially that the contributors are asked to talk about what they enjoyed, but not limit themselves to work published this calendar year. And I was honoured to be asked to talk about my own favourite things of 2011. I forgot lots of things, of course, but that’s what my own blog is for!

Also, Brit Mandelo of Tor.com blogs about her new reprint anthology, Beyond Binary, which includes a story by MEEEEE as well as a whole bunch of more famous and wonderful writers. Hooray for genderqueer SF being talked about!

Nnedi Okorafor blogs powerfully about her discomfort in discovering, in the wake of her marvellous World Fantasy win for Best Novel, that the trophy depicts the head of a very racist, unpleasant person. Ie. H.P. Lovecraft. Which has led to all kinds of conversations across Twitter and other forums about, you know, what kind of alternative trophy could better represent excellence in fantasy fiction, or the history of fantasy literature. I suspect TRADITION is going to win out on this one, or at least a combination of tradition and resistance to change, which are not entirely the same things, but personally I can think of a whole bunch of other unpleasant heads which could take his place. Like Medusa!

Sarah Rees Brennan continues to point out the horrible double standard we have in our culture when it comes to talking about female fictional characters, as opposed to male characters, and the extra levels of perfection (BUT NOT TOO PERFECT) that fictional women are supposed to attain.

Meanwhile, a chap explains male privilege to other chaps. I always enjoy a good explanation of such things, that can be widely linked to, and makes a postitive contribution to the conversation. A part of me though is always a little bit sad, knowing that women have been patiently (and sometimes less than patiently) explaining things rather a lot longer, and it often seems like the message is more heartily supported and embraced when it comes in a male voice. Sigh.

Speaking of men fighting the feminist fight (and don’t think I’m not grateful, cos I’m busy baking shortbread and wrapping Christmas presents, yo no this is not sarcasm, I am actually too busy being barefoot & domestic to deal with internet feminism right now) Mondy has been talking about the latest Gardner Dozois Best of Science Fiction anthology, and the importance of looking at gender breakdowns. I’m linking to his blog because that’s how I take my internet these days (livejournal, I do not miss you and your nested comments of rage) but apparently there’s a whole lot of something-something going on in the comments of said LJ, which I think is under the name mondyboy. My Christmas present to myself this year is not reading said comments. LIFE IS WONDERFUL AND I AM ON HOLIDAY.

Meanwhile, DC Women Kicking Ass, a fabulous Tumblr, is talking about the failure of mainstream comics to market effectively to women, when they have actual properties women who don’t necessarily hang out in comic shops (WHO KNEW?) might be interested in.

Another of my pet topics, that of gendered toys, made the news this week with the announcement that Hamleys, the iconic toy store in London, is getting rid of its ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ floors. This comes after an ongoing Twitter campaign complaining about them, though they claim it is a coincidence that they made the decision. At a time when the gender divide of toys is getting worse and worse, it’s nice to see such a positive step. Having been raging about Lego excluding girls from their main range of toys for years, I’m now discovering the wonderful world of action figures thanks to Raeli’s action figure obsession. And once again, it turns out, the representation of female characters in comics and superhero movies turns out to be a hell of a lot better than what happens in the toy industry. Damn it.

(after feeling guilty for realising that it didn’t occur to me until recently to buy my Doctor Who fangirl daughter a sonic screwdriver, purely because she’s a girl, I had a revelation this week that I have also never been able to bring myself to buy her a toy oven/kitchen set BECAUSE SHE’S A GIRL, even though she adores such toys when she plays with them elsewhere. She’ll live, I reckon.)

Some baking goodness, because linking is easier than actually baking. My friend Iz who is currently building a Moomin House out of gingerbread sent me a Finnish gingerbread recipe which comes with images and instructions that have been enabling her in this wild endeavour. And elsewhere on the internet, keeping in mind that I have to figure out what kind of Doctor Who birthday cake I am going to produce a certain little girl in January, I found this brilliant design for a Dalek Smash Cake, which can be taken apart to discover the jelly mutant dalek inside.

Finally, my favourite Christmas post of the week is by Neil Gaiman, who talks about his Jewish childhood and the desirability of Christmas trees. As a non-Christian, lapsed pagan who is big on traditions being flexible, the Christmas tree is probably the most powerful image of what the festival means to me, and I love hearing about other people’s emotional attachment to it.

I can’t express enough how awesome it was to have two little girls decorating the tree with us this year, and that Jemima is now old enough to hang decorations without automatically gnawing on the tree branches, or stealing plastic-wrapped candy canes to see how many she can fit in her mouth. Also, that Raeli has now heard my stories behind every collected-while-travelling Christmas decoration so many times that she can recite them herself, and she has her own collection of decorations and stories from daycare, kinder and prep, thanks to the crafty factory that kicks into gear in schools across the country at this time of year.

Did you know that the Wombles were aiming for the Christmas No. 1 single this year in the UK? DID YOU?

I went out and watched both movies, as I usually do when Connie Willis structures a story around a piece of Classic Hollywood. They’re both very good movies. But neither of them, for me, has a patch on the personal resonance of, say, Bernard and the Genie, which I adore beyond all reason, or even the resonance of “Miracle” itself.

It’s all personal, though. Christmas cultural texts come from our childhood, from happy moments in our lives, or they just happen like lightning – like anything else that becomes a new, instant favourite. But really, I didn’t start thinking about Christmas texts until I read “Miracle.” So it’s rather meta that, at Christmas time, I start getting the urge to re-read that story.

In my teens, Christmas became a form of rebellion. My Mum had been putting on Christmas festivities for me for my whole childhood and frankly, she was done. Stockings, tree, meh. It wasn’t really her thing at all. So I took over. I filled the damn stockings and decorated the tree, and while I never went to far as roasting a beast (we weren’t really roast kinds of people, the two of us preferring cold seafood picnics on the day) I took on a lot of the energy and work of making Christmas feel Christmassy (the work which now I perform as a mum of small children) because the alternative was not having it at all.

I had a much-worn VHS of Christmas UK shows that I watched over each year while wrapping presents and doing all that festive stuff. I barely remember now what was on it – Blackadder’s Christmas Carol, yes, and a pretendy family video by Smith and Jones, and a Lenny Henry Christmas special, I think. That sort of thing. A bunch of things that had all been on at the same time one year and were now preserved in video tape amber. We probably still have the tape somewhere, but I no longer have a working video (SAD) and a lot of those old tapes are pretty stretched and crackly now.

Then there was Bernard and the Genie. Which, to my dismay, I have still not managed to get hold of on DVD. I must hunt it down. It really is my favourite Christmas movie of all time, and I hope desperately that it holds up. It has Lenny Henry in it, right? And Alan Cummings? And Rowan Atkinson? It holds up, right? (already my inner Galactic Suburbanite is pointing out the minor role of women in the movie, damn it)

Maybe I’d better not watch it again. But… I always think of it when I hear that supermarket favourite, “It’ll be lonely this Christmas.” Also whenever I see pictures of Bob Geldof, because this movie was the first time I ever became aware of his existence. Him and Gary Lineker. True story.

What other Christmas texts resonate with me? More versions of A Christmas Carol, actually. I enjoy the Muppets one, though it’s not a patch on Blackadder. I read the actual book about eight years ago, and was surprised at how good it was, all sleek tight prose and clever bits. Dickens had one good story in him, as far as I’m concerned, and it was this one – a near-perfect structure, and it’s hardly surprising that new, different versions get told over and over again.

(Did I mention, though? Blackadder did it better)

Old movies generally, too. I associate High Society with Christmas because I first saw it (thanks to John Hinde) on Boxing Day. Also I have an annual tradition of noticing that one of the handful of Fred Astaire movies I’ve never seen is scheduled on TV, being delighted, and then missing it entirely. Not all traditions are about what you actually do…

Then there’s the Doctor Who Christmas Specials, which feels like a tradition that has been with us forever, but it really hasn’t. I’m pretty sure last year was the first time that Australia actually got the special on terrestrial TV at Christmas (which for us means Boxing Day, thanks to living in the future), and back in 1996 when David Tennant’s Doctor rang in the tradition, we had to wait something like 4-6 months. That was before I learned how to magically view things that weren’t technically on the telly yet, too! Didn’t figure that one out until… The Next Doctor, maybe? So Doctor Who Christmas Specials weren’t actually a Christmas thing for our family until recently. I am rather chuffed about them now, though. Even if, away from the festivities, they’re rarely as good as an everyday episode. They are CERTAINLY MORE CHRISTMASSY.

It may also be why last year’s Doctor Who Christmas special is my favourite so far. And not because it’s yet another version of A Christmas Carol…

The British tradition of Christmas specials is one that doesn’t quite work in Australia. We try our best, but generally if we do get Christmas TV it’s from a year or two ago. A few of the light entertainment shows do a half-hearted stab at the holiday, but mostly this is the period when our actors all fly to Britain to do panto, and there’s nothing new on the TV at all apart from cricket, so the idea of having event TV scheduled now pretty much baffles us. Having said that, I’m not sure what I’m more excited about this year – Doctor Who or Downton Abbey. Or MAYBE BOTH.

There’s the EastEnders Christmas special, too, which I don’t watch, because the ABC deprived Australians of EastEnders somewhere around the late 80′s. But I got addicted again back in 2002 and followed the damn show through episode synopses for about 5 years afterwards, and I even now I do enjoy hearing about the EastEnders Christmas Doom of Kitchen Sink DOOM every year, in the Guardian.

Hogfather isn’t my favourite Pratchett novel or even my favourite Susan novel but oh, it’s Christmassy! I’ve read that at Christmas a few times. Back when I actually had leisure time at Christmas, HA. These days even getting around to rereading one Connie Willis short story will be a stretch… I have picked up the DVD of the movie, though, and will finally get around to watching it.

There is a clutch of cultural artefacts that remind me deeply of that Christmas we were in London, and had been travelling for five weeks, and couldn’t take it any more, and just bought BOOKS, PRECIOUS BOOKS, even though they were far too heavy. The Last Hero, then, is a Pratchett book of greater holiday significance to me than Hogfather, as is The Lord of the Rings, both book and the first film. Likewise the first Harry Potter film, in which Christmas is the best bit (there is this argument actually for nearly every Harry Potter book or film ever. Christmas is ALWAYS the best bit, because of the jumpers.)

The Futurama Xmas episodes are fun, though we accidentally put one on the other week after decorating the Christmas Tree, only for it to freak out Jem completely. Then I realised that might be her first remembered encounter with a pop culture Santa. OOOOPS. Maybe should have gone with one of the Buffy Christmas episodes instead…

Wow, there’s a lot more of this than I thought.

This year, if I choose to embrace one Christmas cultural text, I think it’s going to be from Big Finish land. Last year I listened to Relative Dimensions, a lovely (if not overly HAPPY) audio play featuring the Eighth Doctor, Lucie, Susan and Alex, and I plan to do so again. Listening to audio, after all, can be done WHILE wrapping presents instead of, well, instead of.

So, those of you who celebrate Christmas, what are your favourite bits of Christmas pop culture? What books, movies, short stories, music, TV specials, etc. do you like to embrace at this time of year, either alone or with your family? Which ones drive you up the wall? If you don’t celebrate Christmas at all (or if like many you celebrate it but don’t actually LIKE it) then are there any other times of year when you embark upon ritual reading, or watching, or listening?