ASK DR. CLAM

Dear Dr. Clam - What's the deal with the BBC? Why don't they make more episodes of Doctor Who? Did I miss something?

Good question! Something that I think is on everyone's mind lately. You have to remember, when a television executive is hired by an organization such as the BBC, he or she is expected to devise programs that "give the people what they want." A few definitions are in order: as used here, "people" are the average Joe's that read at an 8th grade level and think that "Titanic" is an epic for all time. Trying to wrap their minds around concepts like time travel, alien civilizations, and transdimensional engineering (yes, it is bigger on the inside than on the outside) is like trying to put your elbow in your ear - it ain't gonna happen! "Executives" are usually older, conservative, and in business to collect large paychecks (not that there's anything wrong with that!) from even older, even more conservative, executives in the business to collect...you get the picture (anyone who has ever worked in a large corporation say, "Ahem!"). To these individuals, leaving the 1950's was a bad idea - ah, the days of bland music, white bread, and poodle skirts. For them, science fiction smacks of Communism. In other words, what we don't understand can kill us!

That said, the BBC has made more money from "Doctor Who" than any other of its programs (at least last time I checked). Additionally, it has a strong fan following that continues even today - though it's been off the air since the late '80s (for the present let's ignore the 1996 Doctor Who telemovie - that's for another installment of "Ask Dr. Clam"). Yes, the BBC is more than happy to have someone else fund another chapter in the life of our favorite Timelord, but don't ask them to risk failure themselves - and why should they, it's a "win-win" situation for them all 'round - they make money no matter what (after all, they have clams like me that'll buy anything with the "Doctor Who" label) without having to spend any money themselves! Their accountants must be very happy indeed!

In summary, can we blame the BBC for not bringing back the Doctor? Yes...

Dear Dr. Clam - Who is the most "snuggleable" Dr. Who companion of all time?

Good question! Easy answer - Sarah Jane Smith. But wait, for those of you who can't keep up with my 200+ IQ, let's do a little analysis to show you how I reached this inevitable conclusion. To wit, I present the "Dr. Who Companion Snuggleability-Index Chart" (patent pending):
 

(Editor's note: In keeping with the PC '90s, Dr. Clam's answer to this same question for the gay Dr. Who audience (99.9% of the fan base according to Who Fanzines) is James (Jamie) Robert McCrimmon. Just keep in mind what a REAL Scotsman wears beneath his kilt boyz!!!)

Dear Dr. Clam - Is Paul McGann the real thing?

Anyone who has sat and pondered our existence in this universe (why am I here? what is the true meaning of life (some would have us believe '42')?, can a light beer be less filling AND taste good?) eventually comes to the conclusion that not a whole lot really makes sense. Trust me, I've stayed up many a night, drinking beer, surfing the Internet, seeking enlightenment - just like the great philosophers of ancient Greece (well, apart from viewing hardcore smut in a drunken haze). You're saying to yourself, "Well, if that's true, why do we keep going on? Why not just give up?" - the short answer is that every once in awhile something happens ("Something wonderful!") that makes such perfect sense that we feel all is right with the universe. One such event was the the casting of Paul McGann as "The Doctor".

"Oh, come on Dr. Clam, you'd like anyone who stepped into the TARDIS and threw the dematerialization circuit" you say. Yes, you're right - the character is so interesting that almost anyone could get away with playing it...almost. The fact of the matter is that some individuals go way beyond the scripted "Doctor" (can you say Tom Baker in "Pyramids of Mars") and draw you into the "reality" of a time traveling, alien fighting, wise cracking Time Lord. In two short hours (95 minutes with commercials), Paul McGann was able to bring The Doctor back to life (literally!).

Sure, the story was weak, the companion was a wee bit too close to The Doctor (just close your eyes during the kissing sequence...it worked for me), and Eric Roberts couldn't hold a candle to Roger Delgado (THE Master), but all-in-all Paul makes this a piece that holds up to the best Dr. Who that has gone before. One can only dream what could have been if Paul had been able to develop the role - perhaps overshadowing Mr. Baker (Tom not Colin...as if you didn't know).

I can now go to sleep with the feeling that all is right in the universe - after all, Paul McGann has four new Dr. Who audio adventures coming soon. Well, back to surfing for enlightenment on the Web...