Robin Tompkins's Blog: Rob the Writer - Posts Tagged "dr-who"
Sonic Screwdrivers and Other Useful Devices…
So, what has the sonic screwdriver in Dr Who got to do with writing then? Well, look, I’m a Who fan, it says so in my biog, so humour me. This little article gives me a chance to throw in my two pennies worth on a much-debated fan issue and has some points to make about writing too. So, win, win, as they say, unless you don’t like Dr Who of course. In which case…what’s wrong with you?
OK, so there may be the odd person out there who knows nothing of Dr Who and the issue of which I speak, so for your sake, gentle reader…
Dr Who, is the longest running Sci-Fi show in the world, made on and off by the BBC since 1963. It centres around the adventures of a largely benevolent, ancient alien being known as ‘The Doctor.’ The Doctor is in possession of a machine called a Tardis which allows The Doctor and one or more companions to go anywhere in all of time and space. The expressed intent is to explore and observe but generally speaking, The Doctor ends up fighting against oppression intolerance, greed etc and righting wrongs wherever they go.
The Doctor’s intentions are always good and peaceful but he/she often ends up being one of the most lethal pacifists you have ever heard of. Part of these aforementioned good intentions, dictate that he/she will not carry a gun, or other conventional weaponry on their person.
What The Doctor does carry, is a sort of a ‘Space Swiss Army Knife,’ or ‘Extra-Terrestrial Multi-Tool.’ This device is called ‘The Sonic Screwdriver,’
OK, so far so good. Now we come to the issue that divides Whovians and critics alike.
The Sonic, as the device is known for short, has an astonishing array of abilities. A bit too astonishing for many, who claim that it is a ‘get out of jail free card,’ and an excuse for lazy writing, a ‘magic wand’. Those of this opinion, would like the device permanently written out of the show. Those opposed, say that Dr Who wouldn’t be the same without the Sonic, which, barring a short period in the 80s, has been a feature since the Doctor’s second incarnation first used it, back in 1968. (The first Doctor had a sort of a ‘magic ring,’ that served a broadly similar purpose).
So, now we come to my opinion and the bit that’s to do with writing.
It actually makes no sense at all to get rid of the Sonic. In fact, it would make more sense if the Doctor carried more gadgets. For all those who were up in arms about the very brief appearance of ‘Sonic Sunglasses,’ during the Capaldi years, bear with me, I have logic and reason to back this up.
From a writing perspective, from an in-world, narrative stand point, there has to be a Sonic at the very least. Why? Well, POV as people say nowadays, you are a super intelligent alien scientist and engineer, with access to all of the technology that there is, ever has been, or ever will be. Not just all of the human tech but all the extra-terrestrial tech too. Further, you know that your lifestyle is always getting you into life threatening situations and endangering the lives of your companions. Are we seriously suggesting that such a person would carry absolutely no useful technology on them at all? What sense would that make? If I was The Doctor, every stitch of clothing I was wearing, right down to my socks, would be full of concealed, wearable tech.
In fact, not only should there be a Sonic, there should be an in-world explanation for the lack of other devices. Let me offer the suggestion, that the Doctor is concerned about exposing other species to advanced technology superior to their own and so limits the technology to the Sonic, a tool which allows them to MacGyver other devices as needed? It’s possibly not the best explanation but it’s serviceable. There is though, no, sensible reason to carry nothing at all.
As a ‘writing device,’ as opposed to a technological one, the sonic serves another good and useful purpose. Since it seems to be able monitor and detect all manner of substances, hack most computer and surveillance systems and perform medical scans amongst other things, it can save an awful lot of time. The average episode is only forty-five minutes long. Imagine if you had to spend large chunks of time seeking out a medical professional and a sick bay? Finding a hacker and getting them to a terminal, or going to a lab to analyse air samples?
OK, so yes, there is the danger of the Sonic being abused. I would just like to point out, that The Doctor freeing themself from restraints, or unlocking doors, does not constitute abuse, as has been suggested elsewhere. See, my previous argument. Obviously, The Doctor will carry a device for that purpose, even the average TV detective carries a set of lock picks, is The Doctor not as bright as Magnum PI? Again, forty-five-minute episodes in which to establish characters and give them back stories, build atmosphere and tension, explain plot points without massive info dumps and tell a good, satisfying story… that’s a lot. The Sonic as a short cut is not abuse, it’s economical writing.
Yes, yes, I hear you say but it is, used as a ‘get out of jail free card,’ or a ‘magic wand’ to zap away problems. OK, yes, it has been but that is not the fault of the Sonic, that’s the fault of the writer and the showrunner who let them get away with it. The Sonic is needed for all of the aforementioned reasons.
There are plenty of ways to temporarily side-line the sonic. It can malfunction, it can be accidentally left in the Tardis, it can be confiscated to name but three off the top of my head. Also, it is already established that there are things the Sonic can’t do. Famously, ‘it doesn’t do wood,’ and we know it cannot open a ‘’deadlock seal.’
No, the problem is not the Sonic, the problem is the writing. The kind of writer who will abuse the Sonic, is the kind of writer who will just use a different plot device as a ‘get out of jail free card.’ If the Sonic is not available, a gadget will be miraculously found in a drawer, a convenient lightning strike will take out the power, or someone will ‘just happen by at the right moment.’ Removing the Sonic doesn’t remove the problem, it just removes something useful. See, I told you this would be about writing as well as Dr Who.
Anyway, the Sonic is cool…
So, hands off the Sonic. That being said, I have to admit, that I would be fairly pleased if it was held and used like a scientific instrument and not brandished like a magic wand. Some Doctors are worse than others in this regard and it is very much a ‘Nu Who,’ thing.
Even so… Long live the Sonic Screwdriver. Just don’t say, ‘Abracadabra,’ when you wave it around.
OK, so there may be the odd person out there who knows nothing of Dr Who and the issue of which I speak, so for your sake, gentle reader…
Dr Who, is the longest running Sci-Fi show in the world, made on and off by the BBC since 1963. It centres around the adventures of a largely benevolent, ancient alien being known as ‘The Doctor.’ The Doctor is in possession of a machine called a Tardis which allows The Doctor and one or more companions to go anywhere in all of time and space. The expressed intent is to explore and observe but generally speaking, The Doctor ends up fighting against oppression intolerance, greed etc and righting wrongs wherever they go.
The Doctor’s intentions are always good and peaceful but he/she often ends up being one of the most lethal pacifists you have ever heard of. Part of these aforementioned good intentions, dictate that he/she will not carry a gun, or other conventional weaponry on their person.
What The Doctor does carry, is a sort of a ‘Space Swiss Army Knife,’ or ‘Extra-Terrestrial Multi-Tool.’ This device is called ‘The Sonic Screwdriver,’
OK, so far so good. Now we come to the issue that divides Whovians and critics alike.
The Sonic, as the device is known for short, has an astonishing array of abilities. A bit too astonishing for many, who claim that it is a ‘get out of jail free card,’ and an excuse for lazy writing, a ‘magic wand’. Those of this opinion, would like the device permanently written out of the show. Those opposed, say that Dr Who wouldn’t be the same without the Sonic, which, barring a short period in the 80s, has been a feature since the Doctor’s second incarnation first used it, back in 1968. (The first Doctor had a sort of a ‘magic ring,’ that served a broadly similar purpose).
So, now we come to my opinion and the bit that’s to do with writing.
It actually makes no sense at all to get rid of the Sonic. In fact, it would make more sense if the Doctor carried more gadgets. For all those who were up in arms about the very brief appearance of ‘Sonic Sunglasses,’ during the Capaldi years, bear with me, I have logic and reason to back this up.
From a writing perspective, from an in-world, narrative stand point, there has to be a Sonic at the very least. Why? Well, POV as people say nowadays, you are a super intelligent alien scientist and engineer, with access to all of the technology that there is, ever has been, or ever will be. Not just all of the human tech but all the extra-terrestrial tech too. Further, you know that your lifestyle is always getting you into life threatening situations and endangering the lives of your companions. Are we seriously suggesting that such a person would carry absolutely no useful technology on them at all? What sense would that make? If I was The Doctor, every stitch of clothing I was wearing, right down to my socks, would be full of concealed, wearable tech.
In fact, not only should there be a Sonic, there should be an in-world explanation for the lack of other devices. Let me offer the suggestion, that the Doctor is concerned about exposing other species to advanced technology superior to their own and so limits the technology to the Sonic, a tool which allows them to MacGyver other devices as needed? It’s possibly not the best explanation but it’s serviceable. There is though, no, sensible reason to carry nothing at all.
As a ‘writing device,’ as opposed to a technological one, the sonic serves another good and useful purpose. Since it seems to be able monitor and detect all manner of substances, hack most computer and surveillance systems and perform medical scans amongst other things, it can save an awful lot of time. The average episode is only forty-five minutes long. Imagine if you had to spend large chunks of time seeking out a medical professional and a sick bay? Finding a hacker and getting them to a terminal, or going to a lab to analyse air samples?
OK, so yes, there is the danger of the Sonic being abused. I would just like to point out, that The Doctor freeing themself from restraints, or unlocking doors, does not constitute abuse, as has been suggested elsewhere. See, my previous argument. Obviously, The Doctor will carry a device for that purpose, even the average TV detective carries a set of lock picks, is The Doctor not as bright as Magnum PI? Again, forty-five-minute episodes in which to establish characters and give them back stories, build atmosphere and tension, explain plot points without massive info dumps and tell a good, satisfying story… that’s a lot. The Sonic as a short cut is not abuse, it’s economical writing.
Yes, yes, I hear you say but it is, used as a ‘get out of jail free card,’ or a ‘magic wand’ to zap away problems. OK, yes, it has been but that is not the fault of the Sonic, that’s the fault of the writer and the showrunner who let them get away with it. The Sonic is needed for all of the aforementioned reasons.
There are plenty of ways to temporarily side-line the sonic. It can malfunction, it can be accidentally left in the Tardis, it can be confiscated to name but three off the top of my head. Also, it is already established that there are things the Sonic can’t do. Famously, ‘it doesn’t do wood,’ and we know it cannot open a ‘’deadlock seal.’
No, the problem is not the Sonic, the problem is the writing. The kind of writer who will abuse the Sonic, is the kind of writer who will just use a different plot device as a ‘get out of jail free card.’ If the Sonic is not available, a gadget will be miraculously found in a drawer, a convenient lightning strike will take out the power, or someone will ‘just happen by at the right moment.’ Removing the Sonic doesn’t remove the problem, it just removes something useful. See, I told you this would be about writing as well as Dr Who.
Anyway, the Sonic is cool…
So, hands off the Sonic. That being said, I have to admit, that I would be fairly pleased if it was held and used like a scientific instrument and not brandished like a magic wand. Some Doctors are worse than others in this regard and it is very much a ‘Nu Who,’ thing.
Even so… Long live the Sonic Screwdriver. Just don’t say, ‘Abracadabra,’ when you wave it around.
Doctor Who Showrunner says, “modern woke writers are rubbish and they eat tofu and pretend to like it!” shock! horror!
Well, that, or something like it, was apparently said by Russell T Davies recently, at least according to certain sections of the media anyway.
Incoming Doctor Who showrunner Russell T Davies, or RTD as he is generally known for short, is back to helm Doctor Who for the second time. He was the guy who resurrected the series back in 2005 after a long spell in the televisual wilderness.
It seems, however, that he is of the opinion that all new, young writers are boring, woke incompetents, who can’t write for tofu (no, that’s not a spelling mistake).
Or is he? Is that what he actually, said? Even if it was, was that what he really meant?
So, what did he say? The following is the quote in question, which comes from an interview with RTD and fellow writer Mark Gatiss in the Sunday Times…
“I do a lot of mentoring, and there are voices wanting to be heard — of any gender or ethnicity — who consider themselves invisible. They hate the media that ignores them, and they’re trapped into wanting a job in that medium purely to increase representation. I read their scripts and they’re rubbish. They don’t actually love television, so they don’t know how to write for it.”
Gatiss added…
“I’m so glad you said that. Sometimes I think I’m like Pollyanna because I’ve met so many people over the years who hate making television. It seems to make them so miserable. Go and work on the bins or something. It’s hard work — it gives you ulcers — so you have to love it.”
OK, so you could interpret that as, “RTD says all young writers are woke, angry and incompetent.” You could…
Or, he could be saying, these people got into writing for television for all the wrong reasons. To be clear, that’s not me saying that the causes that they are fighting for are wrong, I’m sure they are not, I’m sure they are all angry with good reason. No, I mean that getting into writing for television because you have an axe to grind and you think it will make a good whetstone, is a bad idea.
I am going to broaden this out in fact, I am going to say, that getting into any kind of writing, for television or otherwise, should be done for only one reason. Because you love it, because you want and need to do it.
Don’t go into it for fame, or money, or even because you have a noble cause to shout about. Do it for its own sake.
Here’s the thing. There are literally millions of talented people in the world who can write. Many, many, of them will be better than you, thousands and thousands will be just as good as you and yes some won’t be as good. Any, or all of these people may also have another edge. They may have had exciting, eventful lives, or have top qualifications in some allied field that gives them a reputation to build on. They may just be better connected and all of them, potentially, might just be luckier than you.
Your chances of success are really, low. Sorry, just telling you like it is. That’s not a reason not to try and just like the lottery, you have to be in it to win it. I am not trying to put anyone off, it’s an adventure, go for it. However, let me just refer you back to the gist of that quote from Mark Gatiss. You have, to love it. If you don’t love it, don’t do it.
There is another point here and it can be inferred from the same quote. I don’t know about writing for TV I have never tried it… looking at my sales figures, you might well argue that I don’t know much about writing at all. (yes, that was a short, bitter laugh you just heard). That aside, let me make another statement…
If no one is listening, all words have equal value.
The most profound statement ever written and a ‘dad joke,’ are identical if no one hears them. There has, to be an audience. Extending that, if you are trying to make a point or right a wrong, it must be the right audience. Not your friends and peer groups who already know what you are saying. No, you need the people who are unaware of you and your story. Otherwise, you are still talking to yourself.
Those writers that RTD mentioned need to love writing and the medium in which they are working. They need to understand it, its power and its limitations. If they want to reach the audience they need to reach and not just shout angrily into the echo chamber, they have to learn their craft. They have to love it.
I think RTD has stated elsewhere, in reference to TV budgets, that any television, even something quite modest, costs millions to bring to the screen in the modern world, where Netflix, Disney and Amazon have raised the bar so high. If someone is going to trust you with millions, you had better know what you are doing.
You are not writing for your friends; you are writing for strangers. You have to write characters they will care about and root for, or they won’t come on the journey with you. You have to entertain as well as preach. Never underestimate the power of humour too. Because a story is grim, doesn’t mean you have to tell it in a relentlessly grim way. If you do, there is a good chance you will lose half your audience. Some people love grimdark misery porn but most need a little balance.
Some may find it unpalatable but here is the truth…
You can tell a bad story well and launch a franchise. You can tell a good story badly and sink the ship.
Happy sailing folks…
Incoming Doctor Who showrunner Russell T Davies, or RTD as he is generally known for short, is back to helm Doctor Who for the second time. He was the guy who resurrected the series back in 2005 after a long spell in the televisual wilderness.
It seems, however, that he is of the opinion that all new, young writers are boring, woke incompetents, who can’t write for tofu (no, that’s not a spelling mistake).
Or is he? Is that what he actually, said? Even if it was, was that what he really meant?
So, what did he say? The following is the quote in question, which comes from an interview with RTD and fellow writer Mark Gatiss in the Sunday Times…
“I do a lot of mentoring, and there are voices wanting to be heard — of any gender or ethnicity — who consider themselves invisible. They hate the media that ignores them, and they’re trapped into wanting a job in that medium purely to increase representation. I read their scripts and they’re rubbish. They don’t actually love television, so they don’t know how to write for it.”
Gatiss added…
“I’m so glad you said that. Sometimes I think I’m like Pollyanna because I’ve met so many people over the years who hate making television. It seems to make them so miserable. Go and work on the bins or something. It’s hard work — it gives you ulcers — so you have to love it.”
OK, so you could interpret that as, “RTD says all young writers are woke, angry and incompetent.” You could…
Or, he could be saying, these people got into writing for television for all the wrong reasons. To be clear, that’s not me saying that the causes that they are fighting for are wrong, I’m sure they are not, I’m sure they are all angry with good reason. No, I mean that getting into writing for television because you have an axe to grind and you think it will make a good whetstone, is a bad idea.
I am going to broaden this out in fact, I am going to say, that getting into any kind of writing, for television or otherwise, should be done for only one reason. Because you love it, because you want and need to do it.
Don’t go into it for fame, or money, or even because you have a noble cause to shout about. Do it for its own sake.
Here’s the thing. There are literally millions of talented people in the world who can write. Many, many, of them will be better than you, thousands and thousands will be just as good as you and yes some won’t be as good. Any, or all of these people may also have another edge. They may have had exciting, eventful lives, or have top qualifications in some allied field that gives them a reputation to build on. They may just be better connected and all of them, potentially, might just be luckier than you.
Your chances of success are really, low. Sorry, just telling you like it is. That’s not a reason not to try and just like the lottery, you have to be in it to win it. I am not trying to put anyone off, it’s an adventure, go for it. However, let me just refer you back to the gist of that quote from Mark Gatiss. You have, to love it. If you don’t love it, don’t do it.
There is another point here and it can be inferred from the same quote. I don’t know about writing for TV I have never tried it… looking at my sales figures, you might well argue that I don’t know much about writing at all. (yes, that was a short, bitter laugh you just heard). That aside, let me make another statement…
If no one is listening, all words have equal value.
The most profound statement ever written and a ‘dad joke,’ are identical if no one hears them. There has, to be an audience. Extending that, if you are trying to make a point or right a wrong, it must be the right audience. Not your friends and peer groups who already know what you are saying. No, you need the people who are unaware of you and your story. Otherwise, you are still talking to yourself.
Those writers that RTD mentioned need to love writing and the medium in which they are working. They need to understand it, its power and its limitations. If they want to reach the audience they need to reach and not just shout angrily into the echo chamber, they have to learn their craft. They have to love it.
I think RTD has stated elsewhere, in reference to TV budgets, that any television, even something quite modest, costs millions to bring to the screen in the modern world, where Netflix, Disney and Amazon have raised the bar so high. If someone is going to trust you with millions, you had better know what you are doing.
You are not writing for your friends; you are writing for strangers. You have to write characters they will care about and root for, or they won’t come on the journey with you. You have to entertain as well as preach. Never underestimate the power of humour too. Because a story is grim, doesn’t mean you have to tell it in a relentlessly grim way. If you do, there is a good chance you will lose half your audience. Some people love grimdark misery porn but most need a little balance.
Some may find it unpalatable but here is the truth…
You can tell a bad story well and launch a franchise. You can tell a good story badly and sink the ship.
Happy sailing folks…
