FANDOM


Er, yeah... Edit

Who wrote this nonsense? It is clear that The Last Word is a parody of the Virgin new Adventures. The comic strip had previously deliberately distanced itself from the VNA(as, for that matter, did the EDA/PDA novels, Big Finish Audios, and even the "New tv series"). If is clear and obvious that this comic story is making fun of a typical VNA. AHistory do not include it in their listings, and even explain why in the Introduction(because it is clearly a parody). DWM stick by Ace's so-called "blasphemous" death. This is the comic story equivalent of The Curse of Fatal Death. A quick Google search shows that most Who sites can see that this is clearly a spoof, not part of the main continuity. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.132.179.34 (talk).

None of what you allege is "clear" at all. It's not "a parody", anymore than The Five Doctors is "a parody". Granted, a lot of things happen by rather improbable coincidence — but that's certainly true of The Five Doctors as well.
Let's start by looking at the art style. Nothing about that suggests parody. It's not stylised or exaggerated. In fact, it's easily in the running for the best (i.e., most realistic) renderings in DWM's entire Seventh Doctor collection. Far from the art screaming "parody", it suggests we're meant to take it seriously.
As for the substance of the story itself, I'll agree that there are parodic elements. But that's true of a lot of latter-day Doctor Who. It's important to remember that a thing can have parodic elements without crossing fully over the line and being a full parody. For instance, in The Five Doctors, Susan improbably sprains her ankle just like she and so many companions always did. In The Crimson Horror, she makes a joke at the expense of his fifth self's dedication to getting Tegan back to Heathrow. These are in-jokes — parodies of certain elements contained within Doctor Who lore — but they do not make either story veer off into The Curse of Fatal Death territory.
Now moving onto the continuity of the story, that's an admitted mess — again, though, like a lot of other Doctor Who stories. It's completely understandable why AHistory would relegate it to its own version of an invalid source. But that's because AHistory is trying to do something different than we are. It is attempting to write a single chronicle — "a history" — of the DWU. We here at Tardis aren't really trying to do that. Especially not on a story page. All we're doing is taking the story on its own merit and trying to explain what it is and what it's trying to do.
[I should point out as an aside that we have, by community discussion, specifically outlawed the writing of timelines, precisely because they absolutely require guesswork, speculation and leaps of faith. There is no such thing as a single indisputable timeline of the DWU. For all the energy Parkin has used in disavowing The Last Word, another person could have come up with a theory on how to include it. That's why it's best to think of that book not as "AHistory", but "AnOpinon".]
Now if you want to provide Lance Parkin's specific views on what he thinks the story is in light of the mission of AHistory, that's perfectly fine. But you should only add that to the article. AHistory is just one fan's (published) opinion. You shouldn't take Parkin's views as definitive. It would be wrong to say in the lead something like this:
'''''The Last Word''''' was a comic parody of the Virgin New Adventures range. ([[REF]]: ''[[AHistory]]'')
This wiki isn't trying to copy AHistory. What we hold as supreme is the primary source itself. We kick the tires of that, examine it throughly, and then write what we see. Then we come back through articles and layer in what published authors have seen. But we don't take the opinion of a single published author and make it our central point. If you want to add — not replace existing content, but add to it — a salient quote from Parkin, that's absolutely encouraged.
I think alteredvistas.co.uk sums it up pretty well:
"If you've read them, this strip probably parodies the New Adventures quite well. If you haven't, then it's a mildly enjoyable and attractively illustrated tale with something of a hurried and weak ending."
In other words, yes there are in-jokes for those who know where to look. But if you're not au fait with the New Adventures, the seriousness of the telling allows for a perfectly straightforward reading of the tale. I think the real test of parody is this: put someone who doesn't know Doctor Who in front of The Curse of Fatal Death, and they will soon be able to suspect it's not terribly serious. Put a similar person in front of this comic and they won't think that it's a parody. They'll just think that they don't get it.
czechout@fandom    19:42: Tue 03 Sep 2013
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.