Howling:Who was the Shopkeeper?

Seeing as how The Sarah Jane Adventures has come to an end it seems we'll never find out who the Shopkeeper was, unless the writers decide to just tell everyone or release a book that explains it. We do know that he claimed to be 'a servant of the universe' and that he was probably a time-traveller. Sonanyone have any thoughts on who this shopkeeper and his parrot were? 94.72.209.160talk to me 17:31, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

They were probably new characters who aren't related to anything we have seen before in any of the shows. If the show had continued, then I'm sure we would have found out more of his backstory, but it probably isn't something that can be guessed using only our knowledge of what has been aired.Icecreamdif talk to me 20:04, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

In Sky, the Shopkeeper hinted fairly strongly that Sarah Jane would eventually find out who he and his boss, the parrot, were. Unless they reappear elsewhere, however, we won't find out any more. As Icecreamdif says, what we already know isn't enough to work it out. However, one thing 94 may have missed is that, in Lost in Time, the Shopkeeper stated outright that he was "forbidden to travel in time". That doesn't help to identify him but does cut down the possibilities: He's not likely to have been a Guardian or an Eternal, for example. --78.146.177.197talk to me 22:26, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the fact that he was forbidden to travel through time does suggest that he was, at least at one poing capable of doing so. Still, the fact that SJA's audience largely consists of children, they probably weren't going to make major plots that depended on the viewer having seen an episode of Doctor Who in the 70s or 80s.Icecreamdif talk to me 23:11, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

Humans are capable of travelling in time; that's why the Shopkeeper "recruited" Sarah Jane, Rani and Clyde to do the time travelling for him in Lost in Time. The plot wouldn't, of course, depend on the viewer having seen an episode of Doctor Who in the 70s or 80s. Even some of the viewers' parents would be a bit young to have seen those! That doesn't rule out using a type of being that appeared then, as long as it was presented (and explained) afresh. SJA was very good at using beings from DW but presenting them in such a way that the viewer didn't need to have seen their earlier appearances -- the Slitheen and the Sontarans were both adequately explained for viewers completely new to them. --78.146.177.197talk to me 00:08, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I still doubt that the Shopkeeper was supposed to be something that we've seen before.Icecreamdif talk to me 00:51, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

You're all underestimating TSJA by referring to it as a kids show. I'm not a kid, but I still awaited each episode with the same amount of anticipation as I did a DW episode. So potentially adults could be watching it too. Besides, the Brigadier appeared in TSJA, so nothing disproves that an enemy from classic who, most likely from the Sarah Jane era, could have appeared on the show. In fact it seems quite likely because the BBC probably knew it was the last series and would think it would be nice to give it a nostalgic send-off. 94.72.209.160talk to me 00:58, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

It got better as it went on, but SJA really was a much more childish show than Doctor Who. The very premise of an old lady fighting aliens with a group of kids is childish in itsself. If Sarah Jane had any sense, she wouldn't let any of the kids anywhere near dangerous aliens. Torchwood was by far the better spin-off. Still, I was starting to enjoy the final season of the show, and it did have a few good episodes, like the ones where they brought Lethbridge-Stewart and Jo back. An enemy from Classic Who could have appeared, but the Shopkeeper doesn't seem like anything that we've seen before. From what I remember of the Black Guardian Trilogy and the Key to Time arc, the only guardians that we know of are the black and white ones, and the Shopkeeper doesn't act like either. The eternals seemed far too disinterested in the goings-on of the lesser species, and the Shopkeeper really acts nothing like one of them at all. If anything, he acted like a renegade Time Lord, but I'm sure that they would have saved the return of a Time Lord for the parent show.Icecreamdif talk to me 02:11, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

well, it can't be any of the eternals. didn't they flee during the time war? Imamadmad talk to me 07:43, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Icecreamdif: to be fair on Sarah Jane, the kids brought themselves into her world and would have pestered her for years if she hadn't let them join. It's not like she has retcon or anything unlike Torchwood. 178.78.81.210talk to me 11:21, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

94, "You're all underestimating TSJA by referring to it as a kids show": We're not (at least, I'm not). It was a kids' show -- but it was very far from a typical kids' show. It treated its audience with respect, which is fairly rare even for adults' shows. "So potentially adults could be watching it too": No "potentially" about it; they were.

Icecreamdif, "an old lady fighting aliens" -- in Sarah Jane's own words, "not so much of the 'old'" (Invasion of the Bane). "An enemy from Classic Who could have appeared, but the Shopkeeper doesn't seem like anything that we've seen before": He wasn't an enemy, for a start. You're right, however, that we can add Time Lord to the list of beings the Shopkeeper wasn't.

I disagree that SJA was "childish"; it was aimed at children but that's not at all the same thing. I also disagree that "Torchwood was by far the better spin-off". I enjoyed both about equally. The best of SJA was better than most of TW; the best of TW was better than most of SJA. Watching again on DVD, however, I find SJA stands up to repeated viewing far better than TW does -- knowing what's going to happen does SJA less damage. That just means they were different kinds of shows. --2.96.23.109talk to me 11:32, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Why was TORCJWOOD better? Because of its sexual content? Because of the paranoia that hung over it, the interminable misery? Yes, the writing was better, but I prfer SJA's attitude of hopefulness and fun.Boblipton talk to me 12:28, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think you've partly explained why SJA stands up to repeated viewing far better than TW does -- though there's more to it than only that attitude. --2.96.23.109talk to me 12:35, January 2, 2012 (UTC)