<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title></title>
<meta name="generator" content="HTML::TextToHTML v2.52"/>
</head>
<body>
<h1><a name="section_1">Doctor Who New Adventures</a></h1>
<h2><a name="section_1_1"><em>The Left-Handed Hummingbird</em> by Kate Orman</a></h2>
<p>(an attempt at a spoiler-free review by <a href="http://www.katspace.com/">Kathryn Andersen</a>)
</p><p>This novel is right up there with Love & War in the best NA
category, I think. Why? Hmmm. Many of the NA's are "okay".
They have nothing <em>wrong</em> with them. But to be an outstanding story,
it needs something extra; some character insight or development
which changes the relationship of the major characters, an original
plot/twist/adversary, an excellent turn of phrase - and LHH had
all of these. Here, the Doctor is put in a position he has
never been in before, hoist on his own petard, a victim of his
own way of doing things, caught in a trap that travels with him.
</p><p>(I am reminded of the Blake's 7 quote:<br/>
<em>"When you know an enemy's strengths, and can use them against them,
they become weaknesses."</em><br/>
-- Servalan, to Travis (Blake's 7: Weapon [B3])
)
</p><p>There are some good insights about him and Ace, wondering
if they are more alike than they like to admit...
And finally, those turning phrases, made me want to write again.
It's not often you get some lovely stuff you'd like to quote -
my quotes file has many gems from "Transit", but hardly anything
from the other NA's. This one doesn't have as many quotable
jewels, but a number of places that made you sit up and take
notice. My favourite is:<br/>
"Ashes to nothing. Dust to nothing. Live fast, die young, and
leave a beautiful empty space where you used to be." (p220)
</p><hr/>
<p>This story stood out because, as I said above, this is the first time
that the <em>Doctor</em> has been a victim. There have been times when
he has been helpless to help others. There have been times when
he has been at the losing end, but he has been in control, able to
play for time. There has even been the time, with the Timewyrm,
where half the time he hasn't been in control, but he has always
been playing his game, fencing with the enemy. This time he couldn't
fence at all. The quote from Nietzsche at the start is doubly
fitting now that I know what happened. Because that's what happened.
He gazed into the Abyss, and became a monster. This is a good
follow-on from The Dimension Riders, because the stakes have upped.
In The Dimension Riders, for the first time, the Doctor's clever
plan didn't work, and someone else's clever plan did. He was
helped by someone else. And in The Left-Handed Hummingbird,
the Doctor was up against something too big for him to handle;
he hardly had a plan at all (no great plan involves suicide...),
and that didn't work either.<br/>
The Doctor is so used to being more capable than everyone else
he meets, is he incapable of accepting help from others? I mean
real help, not directed assistance to fight the enemy. He got
into this trouble because he went looking for it.
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: a thunderstorm wrapped in blue
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_2"><em>First Frontier</em></a></h2>
<p>an attempt at a spoiler-free review by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>So, here's the latest NA to pass through my hands. I'm wondering if
the inverse-cover-rule applies to this one: the cover is great, the book
isn't. But actually, the book was okay, even if not terrific. I can
understand why the author said he did it for fun. Strangely enough, it
picked up in the latter half of the book - or else I merely changed my
mood and decided I wanted to read it.
</p><p>The Ace characterisation harked back to the earlier Ace - or perhaps I
was reminded of her because this was, in its own way, a sequel to
"Survival", and that part of it it did well. I tip my hat to the author
that I did not suspect who Kreer really was until it was revealed, even
though enough clues were left around for someone more astute than I to
figure it out, maybe. If I were more up with UFO-ology, I might also
tip my hat to the author about his UFO research, but I don't know enough
to know if he did it well.
</p><p>Benny doesn't seem to have much to do, and the Doctor doesn't feature as
much as he might - there seems to be an abundance of supporting
characters being suspicious of each other, following orders, or being
victims.
</p><p>It was readable, but I'm keeping it for the cover. 8-)
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: a model kit of a flying saucer
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_3"><em>Falls The Shadow</em></a></h2>
<p>reviewed by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>Well, I finally read this one, months after I got it.
</p><p>I can see why someone compared this with "Strange England", though in
one sense, "Strange England" was more vividly horrible. There was more
horror in those singing insects than there was in the two villains. Yet
another NA with a surreal landscape. I wonder if it's a requirement.
No, I don't <em>dislike</em> surreal landscapes, it's just that you start to
get weary of them when they happen a lot. Which NA's <em>didn't</em> have a
surreal landscape in there somewhere?
</p><p>Am I becoming jaded, or are the NAs all running into each other in
ordinariness?
</p><p>Okay spoiler warning time. Discussion time.
</p><hr/>
The cover didn't help. Hard to think of Gabriel and Tanith as perfect
in beauty when the pictures of them on the cover weren't very beautiful
at all. Gabriel and Tanith were just violent. Continuously and
sadistically violent.
<p>But the most interesting question, and here's for the discussion time:
who <em>is</em> the grey man? I mean the author seems to be proposing a change
in the metaphysical nature of the Whoniverse, but there are several
things that don't make sense about it.
</p><ul>
<li>Grey. With white as Good and Black as Evil, Grey seems to style
himself as Doubt. But on the other hand, he seems to style himself as
Chaos. Now, I agree that Order and Chaos are neither good nor evil
(since things like Nazi dictatorships can be very evil and very
orderly). But... aw, I think part of my problem here is that I
disagree with the standing metaphysical order of the Whoniverse with the
Black and White Guardians being <em>equal</em> and opposite, so trying to slot
a Grey Guardian in there is adding to my confusion. But still, I don't
really understand what he's supposed to stand for. Doubt? (and how
would doubt apply to Evil?) Chaos? (and doesn't Evil want to create
chaos as well as order?) Freedom? (but doesn't Good want to create
freedom?) </li><li>His people. Who are his people? Are the Black Guardian and the White
Guardian of his people, or something else? And if they are, then who
are the rest, or are there only three of them? Who are they?</li></ul>
<p>I think I had some more questions, but I can't remember what they were.
</p><p>Kathryn Andersen<br/>
(now I can read Set Piece! Yay!)
</p><p>Later, on Thu, 30 Mar 1995...
</p><p>Ah, I remember now. The other query/problem I had with "Falls the Shadow".
And it was the most important one too.
</p><p><strong>Whoniversal metaphysics warning</strong>
</p><p><strong>Falls The Shadow spoiler warning</strong>
</p><p>Okay, so Gabriel and Tanith were born out of the pain of the universe, a
wounding of the universe, the pain of destroyed potential futures, such as
the one that Jane Page came from. And the Doctor felt guilty because such
pain was caused by him and other time travellers. Am I right, or did I
completely miss what was happening?
</p><p>Because, if that's the case, however poetically appealing it is, it doesn't
make any sense. Because time travel isn't the only thing that destroys
potential futures. If time travel was never invented, millions of
potential futures are destroyed every second, every time someone makes a
decision. Is the author trying to tell me that the <em>natural</em> order of the
universe (that is, a universe supposing time travel had never been
invented, an untampered-with universe) causes a wounding of the universe?
Where is the logic in that, the design?
</p><p>I am assuming that the Darvil-Evans structure of the Whoniverse is the one
that needs to be used: the one which sets the Doctor's Gallifrey way way
back in (to us) the past, which is actually the Present. And the nature of
time travel is such that it is impossible to travel into the Past, into a
point before the Present (thus nobody goes back in time to have a chat to
Rassillon etc), but it is possible to travel into the future, but the act
of travelling into the future and observing and participating in it, makes
that future certain (or almost certain) to occur. It crystalizes it, so to
speak. That there is only one universe; parallel universes take a great
deal of energy to create and they are only temporary. It is not impossible
to change history, but it is difficult, destructive, and a very Bad Thing.
</p><p>So, in all this, why is there pain at the wiping out of possible futures?
It's not as if they had a <em>right</em> to exist: there can be only one
history-of-the-universe in the end. What exists, exists. What might have
existed does <em>not</em> exist, and should not exist.
</p><p>Is it because these potential futures were wiped out "sooner" than they
might have been? Because the actions/decisions that wiped them out
happened before the Present moment actually arrived there? But what does
"before" mean in that context? We're talking about meta-time here,
and that's so hairy I think I'll leave it.
</p><p>(sigh)
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: a Ken Done painting
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_4"><em>Set Piece</em> by Kate Orman</a></h2>
<p>Date - June 5th 1995
</p><p>reviewed by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>The obvious book to compare "Set Piece" to would be the previous
excursion of Kate Orman into the realms of the New Adventures - "The
Left-Handed Hummingbird" (otherwise known in fannish shorthand as
"Hummer"). Oddly enough, I think "Set Piece" was both better and not as
good as Hummer. Better, because I can think of not a thing to point to
that was a problem (on the other hand, maybe I just wasn't looking
carefully enough?). Not as good simply because it wasn't the same kind
of rollercoaster ride that Hummer was, not as much of the sheer
<em>angstiness</em> that was in Hummer. Not the same psychological torture -
here I was more worried about Ace than the Doctor. But maybe that's
just that it's a different book. And it would be only half a point
difference anyway. I did really like Set Piece. Action and
characterisation in even amounts, a few surprises, and a few
not-surprises. 8.5 or 9 out of 10.
</p><p>This story is really Ace's story, not really surprising since this is
the book in which she is written out of the series. The Doctor and
Benny have their parts to play, but Ace is the emotional heart of the
tale. The three time travellers are cast adrift through history when a
rescue attempt goes awry, and the three have to survive in different
eras while <em>something</em> living in a crack in space-time preys on people
from the past, present and future.
</p><p>Here, Ace is all alone, in the alien (to her) culture of Ancient Egypt,
with only her own resources to fall back on, surviving and waiting,
waiting, waiting for the Doctor to turn up and tell her the sneaky plan
he had been preparing all this while. But the last time she saw the
Doctor, "Benny was stooped over the Doctor, frantically trying to get a
response out of him. Blood was trickling from his mouth and nose,
sluggishly. His eyes had flicked shut. Ace wished she could tell Benny
that the Doctor was dead." Isolated, despairing, Ace is in danger of
losing her soul, of making the worst mistake in her life...
</p><p>Again, Kate Orman has sprinkled the work with sharp pieces of prose:
"Suddenly the Doctor did not walk up and say hello." (p50) about Ace's
loneliness. "When you're short of everything except the enemy, you know
you're in combat." (p138) was another good example. And touches of
humour here and there. One might make a complaint, though, that the
Whoniverse is becoming cluttered with metaphysical constructs; previous
New Adventures have dream-encounters with Death and Time - here we meet
Pain, with the Doctor as Time's butterfly. I guess that depends on how
much one enjoys symbolism. There are some very good character moments -
for Ace and the Doctor particularly. Ace faces herself, and the Doctor
wins by losing.
</p><p>The plot as a whole comes together piece by piece, jumping about from
time and place (with a flashback and a red herring or two to stop it
from being too straightforward), becoming clearer as it goes along, and
tieing itself together very satisfactorily. No megalomaniacs, no 'fixed
up in the last five minutes with the wave of a gizmo', and not even a
'I've been subtly planning this behind the scenes for months' which
tends to happen with the 7th Doctor.
</p><p>The way in which Ace departs the series had me cheering. I couldn't
have asked for a better way for her to go. And I'd better not say any
more about that for fear of letting slip hints about what happens.
</p><p>If you are reading the New Adventures at all, there are no excuses for
not reading this one, except perhaps putting it off until you've read
all the previous ones by Paul Cornell, Ben Aaronovich and Kate Orman.
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: chocolate cake with ice cream
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_5"><em>Sky Pirates</em> by Dave Stone</a></h2>
<p>note on <a href="news:rec.arts.drwho">rec.arts.drwho</a> on Thu Aug 17 1995 from kat
</p><p>I only have two things to say about this NA:
1. I expect that persons will have similar attitudes towards this as they
had about The Highest Science.<br/>
2. It made <em>me</em> laugh.
</p><p>Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>(who hasn't read radw for months...)
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: Mystery Science Theatre 3000
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_6"><em>The Room With No Doors</em> by Kate Orman</a></h2>
<p>a rambling rave by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>Whee! She did it again! So I couldn't put it down, what's the
surprise in that?
</p><p>First warning - ignore the back cover blurb. It's misleading. It
tells you too much about the wrong things.
</p><p>Okay, what did we get?
</p><p>The Zen - that was cool.
</p><p>An angst-guilty Chris - of course since I haven't read an NA since...
too long - I don't know what he was referring back to, except that it's
presumably spoiled a previous NA, probably the one just before,
"Eternity Weeps", yes?
</p><p>Fanboy-Joel returns! And drops in a few fannish references, B5
included... Not to mention references back to "Return of the Living
Dad" and "Sleepy". Probably other ones that I missed, too.
</p><p>And the Doctor... his torture is on the inside, this time. Sort of.
</p><p>Plus assorted "demons", legends, fighting, and codes of honour. And how
many ways can one pronounce "Chris"?
</p><p>And I love it how it all came together. Practically driving us nuts
with not knowing what this ruddy pod <em>is</em>! Even though every man and
his dog is fighting over it... typical, neh. <em>And</em> of course, driving
us nuts wondering what the Room With No Doors is too. And What Does It
All Mean? Read the book, and find out.
</p><p>Can a house stand, if it is divided among itself? Can a Doctor stand,
if he is not at peace? This does a bit of foreshadowing about the 8th
Doctor's genesis, which is cool too. Hmmm, can you call it
foreshadowing if we all know what it is referring to already?
</p><p>This is a happening book - and not a happening book. The universe is
not at stake, but that just brings it down to a level we can
comprehend. People. There's certainly a lot of running around. And a
lot of thinking, too.
</p><p>Oh, look, I don't know how it compares with her others, I just enjoyed
it. I liked it better than Sleepy, but then that was the one of
Kate's that I liked the least.
</p><p>Oh, and now that R.J. Anderson's "Sacrifice" is now officially
quoted in an NA, I'll just have to mention that you'd better go off
and read all of<br/>
<<a href="http://www.pobox.com/~rebeccaj/:R.J">http://www.pobox.com/~rebeccaj/:R.J</a>. Anderson>'s
11th Doctor stories, too.<br/>
(Two of which appeared in<br/>
<<a href="http://www.katspace.com/enarrare/e09.html:Enarrare">http://www.katspace.com/enarrare/e09.html:Enarrare</a> 9>).
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_7"><em>So Vile A Sin</em> by Ben Aaronvich and Kate Orman</a></h2>
<p>reviewed by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>They did it again! Another one of those "Huh, what the hell is going
on?" books, from the now-team of Ben Aaronvich and Kate Orman, where it
<em>does</em> all make sense in the end. And here, when we thought everything
was fine, we knew it couldn't be, because the book wasn't over yet.
And again, got to a point where one was thinking, "How on earth are they
going to get out of <em>this</em>?" and they did anyway. Surely it must be hard
to think of yet more universe-threatening threats, and yet they did it.
And very sensibly, they put the body on page one. Since everybody knew
she was dead already, might as well take advantage of that, and still
manage to leave us in suspense.
</p><p>And of course, the in-jokes and past-adventures references - noticed
the Tara reference - sneaky! And Kate(?) put in more "guns and frocks"
jokes, um, in-jokes. I dunno, I can't see a reference to guns and frocks
in Kate's books any more without smiling.
</p><p>But the title <em>still</em> looks like an anagram to me.
</p><p>A silver-dusted Rubic's Cube that someone does for you, on the Sid &
Nancy scale.
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_8"><em>Lungbarrow</em> by Marc Platt</a></h2>
<p>reviewed by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>Well, I had gotten the impression from comments by other people that I
would find this one confusing, that it would raise more questions than
it answered, but I don't think so. It answered quite a few questions,
or, strictly speaking, dropped the broadest of hints, hints which
followed up the intriguing hints about the Doctor's past which had
been dropped in COLD FUSION. Tied up quite a few loose ends, really.
It even explained the return of the sonic screwdriver! In atmosphere, it
reminded me somewhat of STRANGE ENGLAND, but more, really, of GHOST LIGHT.
</p><p>After I read this, I realized something about many of the New Adventures.
Much of the TV Who was dedicated to de-mystifying things. Gods are just
aliens, faith as a weapon against haemeovores, human culture as a result
of alien interference, and so on. But the New Adventures are bringing the
Mystery back - and I don't just mean making the Doctor more mysterious,
Leela's comment in LUNGBARROW about the Doctor notwithstanding. All the
bits about Death and Time and Pain, the "gods" of Gallifrey, are bringing
back the Otherness (and I don't mean the Other!), bringing the Mythic into
Doctor Who. And I like it.
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: a giant's house
</p><hr/>
<h2><a name="section_1_9"><em>The Dying Days</em> by Lance Parkin</a></h2>
<p>reviewed by Kathryn Andersen
</p><p>Here we are - the first of the New Adventures to feature the 8th
Doctor instead of the seventh; the end of an era, and the beginning of
a new one; ushered in by another on of the NA authors that I admire.
</p><p>Whee! This one was more slow-moving than the others I had read in my
recent Who-thon. It was also more straightforward. I was tempted to
complain that there wasn't enough of the Doctor and too much of Benny
(if one could really have too much of a well-written Benny), that I
didn't get to see the 8th Doctor shine in his own unique Doctorish way,
but I was wrong. It just took a while, that's all. I kept on looking
at the cover to remind myself of him. I'm looking forward to the
BBCNA's simply because I want more 8th Doctor. But don't let me give
you the impression that the Doctor and Benny are the only decent
characters there. The Brigadier's there as well, and gets in his own
thoughtful moments. Plus other supporting decent characters;
particularly the little bits with Doug and Oswald. (grin) I have a
suspicion that there are some in-jokes there that I missed. Oh well,
didn't stop me from enjoying it. Particularly the end.
</p><p>Sid & Nancy scale: roast beef
</p>
</body>
</html>