Forum:Is in-character linking narration canonical?: Difference between revisions

So yanno how BBC Video used to release incomplete serials with linking narration to cover the lost episodes?  Sometimes, that used an actor who wasn't in character providing the narration, as with [[Tom Baker]] on ''[[Shada (TV story)|Shada]]''.  But ''[[The Crusade]]'' release has [[William Russell]] ''fully'' in character as [[Ian Chesterton]].  They even give him a lower third which reads, "Ian Chesterton".  So is that a valid image of Ian?  And if so, doesn't it counter the ''[[Death of the Doctor]]'' notion that Ian never aged?  And to the extent that there are other in-character linking narrations, do we take them seriously? {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''21:43:52 Thu&nbsp;'''18 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>

::Just sticking to ''The Crusade'' for a minute, the thing is, that's a very different reconstruction to either Baker on ''Shada'' or Ford on ''Reign of Terror'' or Anneke Wills giving linking narration for ''Power of the Daleks'' on CD.  Unlike these other cases, it's done as a scene with the character of Ian, not with the actor.  It is Ian looking back on his life and remembering the story of how he got knighted by King Richard.  It's released by the BBC, the tape's producers took the time to create a properly dressed and realistic set, and there's proper multiple-shot editing.  It's in every sense a licensed narrative, and it does connect to the broader canon by confirming things that happened in other media.  For instance, he references [[PDA]]: ''[[The Witch Hunters]]'', which was, at the time ''The Crusade'' VHS was released in [[1999]], the very latest story involving Ian.  It just seems like there was a genuine effort to make the piece fit into continuity. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''04:11:34 Mon&nbsp;'''22 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>

::::Well, I think it's a special case so it kinda deserves special rules.  I only have two examples that spring readily to mind.  One is this ''Crusade'' thing.  The other is the [[Fourth Doctor]] version of ''[[The Power of the Daleks]]''.  I think I'd be okay with references to them both being the company that produced the thing they were on.  So for instance [[BBC Video]]: ''[[The Crusade]]''.  The problem here is, of course, that these little segments have no name.  The only distinguishing characteristic is really the medium/company of release. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''22:43:14 Mon&nbsp;'''22 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>

:Well, BBC Wales makes virtually no pronouncements on what they think of as a "valid" story.  And the issue here is that there's an official BBC-made in-character "snippet" which directly challenges the BBC Wales-made episode of [[SJA]] on the issue of the [[21st century]] nature of [[Ian Chesterton]]. Sarah Jane tells us that Ian is unaged from his 1963/5 appearance, whereas this in-character linking narration shows us a man with white hair claiming to be Sir Ian Chesterton.  And don't even get me started  on the minefield that is the Fourth Doctor narration of ''The Power of the Daleks''.  Thing is though we do need to at least ''consider'' how to deal with these oddities. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''02:47:05 Tue&nbsp;'''23 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>

:::Now, the broader implication here, I think, is that if you let in this one, you have to let in the Fourth Doctor retelling of the Second Doctor story, ''Power of the Daleks''.  I wanna say there's another one like this out there, too — maybe a Sixth Doctor linking of something First Doctor? — and those would be considerably more complicated to deal with than "Sir Ian Reminisces", for lack of a better title.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''19:20:50 Wed&nbsp;'''24 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>