Doctor Who, redux

[tahnan]

You know, I still adore this show, but I do wish if they're going to make a language-based joke, they'd do a little basic research. In particular, the word "fan" with the meaning "fanatic" dates back to the 1600s; I rather suspect Dickens wouldn't have been much surprised by it.

Comments

[space-parasite.livejournal.com]

Isn't that the first recorded instance of the word being used, with no information on how much it was used between then and now?

[tavella.livejournal.com]

Yeah, and the list of citations is as follows:

1682 New News from Bedlam 13 The Loyal Phans to abuse. Ibid. 40 To be here Nurs'd up, Loyal Fanns to defame, And damn all Dissenters on purpose for gain. 1889 Kansas Times & Star 26 Mar., Kansas City base~ball fans are glad they're through with Dave Rowe as a ball club manager. 1896 ADE Artie xvii. 158 I'm goin' to be the worst fan in the whole bunch. 1901 Dialect Notes II. 139 Fan, a base ball enthusiast; common among reporters. 1914 Daily Express 3 Oct. 3 First League football ‘fans’ in London can have a joyous time to-day. 1915 Film Flashes 13 Nov. 1 It is quite usual for a picture ‘fan’ to come out of one theatre and immediately cross the road to another. 1919 W. T. GRENFELL Labrador Doctor (1920) iv. 56 Among my acquaintances there were not a few theatre fans. 1921 A. W. MYERS 20 Yrs. Lawn Tennis 142 This was sheer spectacular tennis, dear to the hearts of the American ‘fans’. 1925 H. V. MORTON Heart of London 93 The fight fans howling like a pack of hungry wolves. 1928 S. VINES Humours Unreconciled xiii. 168 What about..your League of Nations and disarmament fans? 1950 Manch. Guardian Weekly 4 May 15/4 The Water Department..had received..‘good-natured’ complaints from base-ball fans about the washing-out of two days' play.

Which strongly suggests that the 1625 appearance was a neologism for 'fanatic' that never caught on, and then was separately reinvented in the late 1800s. So indeed, Dickens would have been a bit confused.

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

Or that it was well-known but generally too slangy to appear much in print until the rather vulgar Americans got their hands on it. I wonder.

[navrins]

I didn't know that, but I was still annoyed by Dickens's reaction. It's traditional bad sci-fi writing. (Which may be in genre for Doctor Who; I've only seen a few episodes ever, and the one I'm talking about now is not yet one of them.) But nobody would respond like that. They'd say something more like "Huh?" Or, "I'm sorry, you're a what?" The only reason for him to explicitly say the thing that the meaningless sentence would mean if it meant anything is for the writers to explain to the audience why Dickens doesn't understand.

[mildmannered.livejournal.com]

Maybe Charles doesn't get out much?

Yeah, that exchange was awkward, but Eccleston's sustained geek-out ("You're a genius, you are!") was a little bit priceless.