?

Log in

No account? Create an account
parrot_knight [userpic]

Time and Relative Dissertations update

October 30th, 2007 (11:34 pm)

Books despatched from the printers this afternoon, and on their way to bookshops everywhere.

Comments

Posted by: Penny Paperbrain (pennypaperbrain)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 06:37 am (UTC)

It's even got an Amazon sales rank, which suggests someone bought it!

Posted by: wellinghall (wellinghall)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 08:19 am (UTC)

That would be me :-)

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 09:53 am (UTC)

Thank you! The more, the merrier...

Posted by: daniel_saunders (daniel_saunders)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:02 pm (UTC)
Outsider

I'll be buying it, but for budgetary reasons I'm waiting until next week.

I like the fact that it is just over £15 at Amazon, qualifying for free delivery by itself.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:07 pm (UTC)
SarahJaneSmith

I very much look forward to your views on the essays contained therein.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 09:53 am (UTC)
Students

I suspect that this book will sell rather more copies than other media studies books Manchester University Press are putting out...

Posted by: Penny Paperbrain (pennypaperbrain)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 12:39 pm (UTC)

Is there actually a Who intelligentsia out there, that buys these books as well as contributing to them?

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 12:56 pm (UTC)

Certainly! The pre-2005 Doctor Who Magazine has even been called one of the best media studies journals ever published in the UK, a rare accolade for a licensed title, I should think.

Posted by: daniel_saunders (daniel_saunders)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:05 pm (UTC)
Outsider

Without wanting to sound cynical, who called it that? Not that I'm saying the praise is undeserved, I'm just curious.

I wish the contemporary magazine wasn't so... well, I hesitate to say 'dumbed down,' given that it's aimed at a younger audience, but then again, I was 13 when I started buying DWM regularly, during Gary Gillatt's editorship, and the analytical articles were my favourite part, even when I hadn't seen (or even read the novelisations) of the stories in question.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:20 pm (UTC)

I still think that a lot of DWM's bad press is undeserved; there's a lot of self-criticism by the production team in there, for example, Phil Collinson's admission that the budget for Evolution of the Daleks was miscalculated, leading to the removal of the original climax. I'm not sure that it is aimed at a younger audience now (the responsibility of being accessible seems to have been taken from their shoulders by the arrival of Doctor Who Adventures) though plenty of young teenagers and pre-teens seem to be reading it; but they have certainly been enjoined not to spoil the party, and that has blunted the magazine's critical edge; there's normally about 50% content nowadays which fails to engage me, something that didn't used to happen.

Posted by: daniel_saunders (daniel_saunders)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:56 pm (UTC)
Outsider

there's a lot of self-criticism by the production team in there,

I'm not sure I'd say a lot, but there is some. However, I can't recall a single new series episode getting a bad review.

there's normally about 50% content nowadays which fails to engage me, something that didn't used to happen

Yes, I'd agree with that. I still enjoy the Fact of Fiction articles, and some of the set reports (although most of them could do with pruning, just because there isn't enough to say to justify the word-count), but increasingly little else - although, oddly, the comic strip, which I hadn't cared about for a long time, seems to have hit new heights of maturity over the past eighteen months or so.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 08:43 pm (UTC)

The one new series episode that did get a bad review was Last of the Time Lords, which he sees as a mistake on so many levels.

Posted by: daniel_saunders (daniel_saunders)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 08:56 pm (UTC)
Outsider

I'll have to re-read that. I didn't think the review was particularly critical, although perhaps that was because the last three episodes were reviewed as a unit.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 08:46 pm (UTC)
Sylvester

'he' being Dave Owen.

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 09:08 pm (UTC)

I forgot to reply to your question - it was James Chapman, in his talk to the Oxford University History Society in 2006.

Posted by: viala_qilarre (viala_qilarre)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 02:06 pm (UTC)

Fantastic!I'll see if I can get hold of a copy. (Even though I probably won't understand it).

Posted by: parrot_knight (parrot_knight)
Posted at: October 31st, 2007 04:21 pm (UTC)
Zen

That comment by MJW about The Unfolding Text lingers, doesn't it...? I think that thirteen was the best age to read that book, though.