The Tardis Guide Dating Controversy

Hello! I noticed something which I find a little confusing regarding the dating for different stories, and thought might prompt an interesting discussion.

So, TV stories are pretty clear; if it’s set before broadcast, it’s a past story, and so on.

But the expanded universe stuff has tripped me up. Take “The Way Forwards” for instance. That’s set in 1986, and it’s listed as future. But for whom, exactly? For the Doctor and Zoe it’s the far past. And the story was published in 2011, so it’s the past for the author, and us, too.

Are we saying that story settings depend on what era the stories are intending to emulate? I get the intuition; if the story had come out in the 1960s, that would indeed be the future. But that surely leads to strange problems down the line, when you get stories that don’t fit that category, or crossover, or do other unusual things we haven’t even imagined.

I suppose my point is - wouldn’t it be wiser to classify these based on when they were published, rather than a more subjective notion of when they’re supposed to fit in?

EDIT: Got my wires crossed - it’s Victoria, not Zoe. Still, I hope you get my point - even if it’s based on companion perspective, that still seems to present more headaches than publication (for instance, are Pertwee-era UNIT officers from the 70s or 80s…?)

9 Likes

Time Travel depends on the publishing date. The situation is that @shauny once thought it should be defined by the companion’s reletive time, so uploaded a bunch of stories as such, before deciding it doesn’t work so it’s a bit messy right now. Me and a few others are uploading our edits through the suggestions form when we notice a mistake

Edit: If you want to help sorting it out, I’m sure @shauny would be glad to give you access to the suggestion form. Now every edit need three seperate approvals before going live, and we have a small team of mod doing that

9 Likes

Lovely! Thanks for getting back to me. I totally get either method but glad we’re going for the one with the Isaacian “kernel of epistemically robust truth”.

6 Likes