Again, I am left with the feeling that you didn't read what I wrote.
As am I (left with the feeling that you didn't read what I wrote).
The actual point being made is that the Doctor didn't understand why Sarah Jane felt that way -- he clearly both understood and shared in Rose's grief in Doomsday (as is made visually clear by his tears). My point was about the Doctor, not about Rose.
He is surprised, yes, but he also grieves for Sarah Jane (see: "imagine that happening to someone you - ", which is Not About Rose. No, seriously.).
You know, the part where I mention what goals he appears to have is in the very first sentence of my post: Because Russell T Davies seemed to feel that the show needed to have a character who would fall in (unrequited) love with the Doctor, thus illustrating the difference between Rose and everyone else. Did it?
Given the assumption of an unrequited love arc, you need a character in unrequited love. Thus, your title question is quite easily answered. Given RTD's goals for S3, yes, Martha was needed.
RTD considers the movie to be canon (as shown when he uses Paul McGann's face as one of the 'many faces' in the Doctor's journal in Human Nature/Family of Blood). Again, that would appear to make it relevant -- he picked up a thread that he liked (much in the way he picked up the Master, the Daleks, the Cybermen, the Autons, etc), tweaked it, and ran with it.
In the case of the Daleks, the Cybermen, and the Autons, they are obviously from the classic series. There is no connection between Grace and Rose, save that they were companions to the Doctor.
(Also, you might want to look into Eight canon other than the TVM. There's a hell of a lot more than the TVM.)
In any case, Rose is hardly the standout companion you want her to be. She was - and is - very important to the Doctor. However, "the difference between Rose and the rest of the Doctor's companions" is primarly that of romantic love...
In other comments, you have asserted that you don't think friendship is less important that love, why does your point about Rose rest on the difference between the type of love?
If you had read my point, I don't think there is a difference between Rose and Everyone Else, as you seem to think there is. However, you do think there is a difference between Rose and Everyone Else. Other than romantic love - which remains the only thing you've brought up - what is the difference?
Whether or not Rose is a stand-out companion is a matter of opinion -- I think she's clever, brave, compassionate, loyal, curious, and rather fantastic. You disagree.
I don't, actually. I think Rose has many positive qualities. However, I think that Sarah Jane & Martha are equally fantastic. She can be a good character without being the best thing ever, and without being better than the companions that came before and after her.
But romantic love is not, by default, the most important thing in the world, and that was the point I was making.
Odd, that. That would be exactly my point, and why I think Martha's arc did not make her any less valid (or needed) of a character than Rose.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-24 07:39 pm (UTC)As am I (left with the feeling that you didn't read what I wrote).
The actual point being made is that the Doctor didn't understand why Sarah Jane felt that way -- he clearly both understood and shared in Rose's grief in Doomsday (as is made visually clear by his tears). My point was about the Doctor, not about Rose.
He is surprised, yes, but he also grieves for Sarah Jane (see: "imagine that happening to someone you - ", which is Not About Rose. No, seriously.).
You know, the part where I mention what goals he appears to have is in the very first sentence of my post:
Because Russell T Davies seemed to feel that the show needed to have a character who would fall in (unrequited) love with the Doctor, thus illustrating the difference between Rose and everyone else. Did it?
Given the assumption of an unrequited love arc, you need a character in unrequited love. Thus, your title question is quite easily answered. Given RTD's goals for S3, yes, Martha was needed.
RTD considers the movie to be canon (as shown when he uses Paul McGann's face as one of the 'many faces' in the Doctor's journal in Human Nature/Family of Blood). Again, that would appear to make it relevant -- he picked up a thread that he liked (much in the way he picked up the Master, the Daleks, the Cybermen, the Autons, etc), tweaked it, and ran with it.
In the case of the Daleks, the Cybermen, and the Autons, they are obviously from the classic series. There is no connection between Grace and Rose, save that they were companions to the Doctor.
(Also, you might want to look into Eight canon other than the TVM. There's a hell of a lot more than the TVM.)
In any case, Rose is hardly the standout companion you want her to be. She was - and is - very important to the Doctor. However, "the difference between Rose and the rest of the Doctor's companions" is primarly that of romantic love...
In other comments, you have asserted that you don't think friendship is less important that love, why does your point about Rose rest on the difference between the type of love?
If you had read my point, I don't think there is a difference between Rose and Everyone Else, as you seem to think there is. However, you do think there is a difference between Rose and Everyone Else. Other than romantic love - which remains the only thing you've brought up - what is the difference?
Whether or not Rose is a stand-out companion is a matter of opinion -- I think she's clever, brave, compassionate, loyal, curious, and rather fantastic. You disagree.
I don't, actually. I think Rose has many positive qualities. However, I think that Sarah Jane & Martha are equally fantastic. She can be a good character without being the best thing ever, and without being better than the companions that came before and after her.
But romantic love is not, by default, the most important thing in the world, and that was the point I was making.
Odd, that. That would be exactly my point, and why I think Martha's arc did not make her any less valid (or needed) of a character than Rose.