[net.tv.drwho] K-9, Pro or Con

wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (07/18/84)

I would say I liked K-9; however, he seems to be treated much too
inconsistently by the multiple writers. Either he is a dog or
he isn't. Either he is a reliable super-machine or he isn't. Not
sometimes yes and sometimes no. At times he has to ask/order people
to get brought down from a table, rescued from a boat, or otherwise
saved from his seeming incapability to handle movement on other than
flat surfaces. Other times, he appears as a "deus ex machina" without
regard to stairways, rugged terrain, or other obstacles which would
actually prevent his getting there if his movements were really so
restricted. This sort of thing is annoying. 

His powers seem to last as long as the writer-of-the-episode-in-question
seems to wish them too; then, when it is convenient to add difficulties
to the plot, suddenly he needs to recharge. (And he just recharges with
an arbitrarily-variable amount of time; he doesn't need to plug-in
onboard the Tardis or locate sunlight, heat, or any other energy source.)
This is just sloppy writing.

I like K-9 because I like dogs. Even mechanical ones. Even ones with
insides made of a few surplus printed circuit cards glued together
randomly (ever notice the silly internal construction shown when his
side panels are off?). But Dr. Who cries out for a consistent overall 
control of the "Dr. Who Universe" in some form of writers' guide, like
was prepared for Star Trek. (It didn't solve all the problems created
by multiple writers there, either, but it helped a lot!) Such control
could make the use of K-9, the Tardis, assistants, guests, stowaways
and assorted hangers-on, etc. much more acceptable.

Somebody zip back in time to when this was being planned at the BBC
and sit in on a few conferences and nudge them into planning a bit
better, please...

Will