Hanky-Panky in the TARDIS… With Clara?

ClaraDoctorKissThe DOCTOR WHO Christmas Special (“The Snowmen”) is closing in fast, and with Amy and Rory dead and buried, it’s time for a (pretty) new face. And, apparently, time for some mistletoe, if the photos at left are anything to go by!

We know that come Yuletide, in the wake of the loss of his best friends, the Doctor (Matt Smith) will be all dark and mopey and sad and angsty and withdrawn from the universe. (Not even his friends Madame Vastra, Jenny and Strax can entice him into playing the Great Detective with the promise of adventure.) However, into his life steps a new assistant (played by Jenna-Louise Coleman), one who shakes him out of his doldrums and convinces him to travel through space and time once more.  But how does she do it?

Matt hinted to Britain’s Radio Times that the Doctor’s motivations might just be a little risqué for a married man! Matt explained:

“What’s interesting with a new companion is that it changes the way he is and affects his personality. I think, in one way or another, the Doctor is always attracted to his companion and he’s certainly taken by this striking young lady…

The fall of the Ponds had a grave effect on the man. I think he’s quite lonely and removed from the universe and not really as engaged as he was, at his best with Amy and Rory.

Handily, he meets a jaunty new companion, a hot chick…”

Hmmm, what might River Song have to say about the Doctor gallivanting about the universe with a pretty young thing batting her eyelashes at him while he swoons? We’ll have to wait until the second half of the season, this spring.

What do you think? Is it too soon for the Doctor to have his head turned by another assistant? Should the ancient rule about “No hanky-panky in the TARDIS” be kept in place?

One thought on “Hanky-Panky in the TARDIS… With Clara?

  1. Except that “No hanky panky in the TARDIS” isn’t all that ancient. It didn’t actually come about until John Nathan-Turner got his hands on the show. Until then, there was nothing said about it. It really irritates the hell out of me how fanboys seem to think this was a hard and fast rule since the beginning of time. It wasn’t one until the 80’s.

    I think they’re just winding the uptight fanboys up by talking up the whole “attraction” bit. So she kisses him in this episode. So what? How is this any worse than River making sly comments about how her being a “screamer” is a spoiler? And thanks to Moffat ruining the character, I honestly don’t care what River thinks. Their marriage was a sham anyway, only done so she would do what he wanted, and happened in a time line that no longer exists.

    TL;DR version: Who cares, really? It’s just one kiss. It’s not like he throws her down into the snow and has his way with her or anything.


Oh, yeah? Sez you!

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.