Would NewWho be a better or worse show if Classic Who never existed?

What I mean by this question is that, let's just say that in 2005, Doctor Who was this brand new show, Eccleston was the first Doctor and Doctor Who from 1963-2005 was never a thing. Would Doctor Who from 2005 still be seen as good or bad television to you? Because I've recently been asking this question myself, and I can't seem to find a good answer for myself.

Unfortunately, you do occasionally get a lot of divs who genuinely think RTD created the whole bloody thing.

Given that I originally discovered Doctor Who via the New Series, I’d have seen it as good TV as I had when I first saw it, although I suspect my passion for it would have dwindled over time, to a point where I merely saw it as an inconsequential footnote of childhood. The Classic series has sustained my passion for the brand over the years more than anything else, and New Who does lose its longevity over the passing of time by comparison, at least in my case, mainly because the Classic Series was rife with literary and scientific influences, as well as being a unique series within its zeitgeist, which maintains its appeal for me when compared to New Who.

Although I’d probably dislike it less if Classic Who never existed, as it wouldn’t have done damage to an already commendable brand, though I’d also care less about it to discuss it at all.

I wouldn't have stuck with it as long as I did, that's for sure...

SomeCallMeEnglishGiraffe wrote:What I mean by this question is that, let's just say that in 2005, Doctor Who was this brand new show, Eccleston was the first Doctor and Doctor Who from 1963-2005 was never a thing. Would Doctor Who from 2005 still be seen as good or bad television to you? Because I've recently been asking this question myself, and I can't seem to find a good answer for myself.

My feeling is that because I was a fan already, I was prepared to hold out with the new show for the bits that might speak to me as a fan. A lot of the show actually didn't seem to speak to me, and instead seemed to speak to the trashier end of shallow pop culture and the soap audience.

So if there'd been no Classic Who, I probably wouldn't have had any patience with the show and would've felt it was speaking to an audience I largely despise (this isn't to say I do despise New Who's audience or fandom, but I do feel the show treated them as the lowest common denominator).

I think also it would've not been defended quite so obnoxiously by its cult of sycophants because of course there'd be no Classic fandom then, and in any case if the show wasn't a desperate attempt to revive the popularity of a show that had been cancelled before, the more tacky and pandering content would've been less likely to be excused as a necessity to keep the show on air.

And if I'm being honest, I don't think I'd have come to hate New Who quite as much if not for its most obnoxious and disgusting cheerleaders making me hate it more by trying to tell me I wasn't allowed to.

All that's perhaps beside the point.

My feeling is that there was always maybe a good, or even excellent show in there somewhere, trying to get out. But it was buried in so many layers of tarted up makeup, crap, schmaltz and RTD's worst excesses that it was almost too sickening sometimes to dig for the few gems.

I would not care about Nu-Who were it not for the original classic series.

I only give the RTD / Moffat / BallChin era show the time of day because of my interest in the original show. The style of writing, the type of stories, the characterisations employed by the production teams nowadays would not appeal to me or grab my interest were it not for its links to classic Who - however tenuous they may be.

Sorry if that seems to avoid your question but that's all i got!!!

One thing I will say is it would work as a standalone TV show in its own right (or at least the RTD era would), in the same way the Jon Pertwee or Tom Baker era could've in isolation.