ericadavies1982 I used to watch this when it was on TV, and then years later i have bought the box set, and looking at the episode list and the lists on the DVD they don't match up. anyway, i am so glad that Jayne saw the scripts and decided to take the role as Dr Quinn, in a way sad for her to make a personal choice to do the work cause of her husband, but after seeing the show and watching DVD if Jayne didn't take the part who would, also glad that the pilot casts of 4 members changed they didn't suit the characters as those who went on from episode 2. shame that Erika's father made a bad choice not to let her continue her role. i loved everything involved with the show. and i did see on many occasions that actors was used again. one that i remember (only today i watched a DVD), was a cowboy who went on the run with a baby, and later becomes Sully's best friend.

grizzledgeezer Science fiction is popular in part because it permits facile commentary on contemporary society. "Doctor Quinn, Medicine Woman" * reverses (and arguably perverts) this by using the past to justify the present. Criticism is converted into corroboration: our present values /must/ be correct, because bold pioneers of a century ago espoused them. And if such pioneers didn't exist, we'll create them, with the justification "it's just entertainment". MAD's spoof nailed this by d(r)ubbing the show "Dr Quack -- Modern Woman".A significant criticism of "Star Trek" is that Kirk & crew are rarely obliged to question the validity of /their/ views. They forcibly impose their values on what they view as corrupt or non-normative societies needing correction. Similarly, Dr Quinn's point of view must ultimately win out -- because that's the show's raison d'etre.The nature of episodic television limits its ability to tell "morality tales" well. Ambiguity is rarely acceptable, because problems usually /have/ to be resolved by the end of the hour, reducing the possibility of a subtle or nuanced consideration of the issues.You might want to read "Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman and the Prime-Time 'Outing' of Walt Whitman" at http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1573&context=wwqr. It's not only an intelligent discussion of a notorious episode, but a condemnation of the series as a whole (which the author probably /did not/ intend). It points up the difficulty of trying to handle complex issues in a single episode, using stock characters to represent stereotypical points of view.What's deeply obnoxious about the Whitman episode (and similar shows) is not its corruption of historic fact, but its care-less redefinition of who Walt Whitman (or any other figure) was. Walt was self-centered and self-aggrandizing, the very model of the self-defining American. It's not by accident Whitman became /the/ American poet, or that one of his best-known works is "Song of Myself".Had the scriptwriter bothered to spend a few days learning something about Whitman (he's well-represented by his poetry, essays, letters, and conversation books), "The Body Electric" would have been a more interesting and /challenging/ program. Instead, in an act of intellectual laziness and utter irresponsibility, the writer created the Whitman /she/ wanted to see.Needing a situation to provoke public confrontation, the scriptwriter has Dr Quinn inadvertently encourage Whitman to invite Peter Doyle. This would not have occurred. Whitman's diaries show he was driven to distraction by his unrequited sexual attraction to Doyle, so it's hard to believe Whitman would have invited someone (while recuperating) whose presence might have caused emotional distress.Dr Quinn need not have worried about Whitman molesting Brian, because Whitman -- hardly the plain-talking working-class "rough" he affected -- would /never/ go fishing with /anyone/, let alone a child. He'd have found the nearest restaurant and had steak and a beer -- or champagne.Particularly lamentable is the writer's fatuous exchange with Brian: "Are you a sinner?" Whitman replies, "Last time I looked the Good Book says we're all sinners." Uck. You don't need to read much Whitman to see that his idea of "sin" has little relationship to Judeo-Christian beliefs.Nor is it believable Whitman would utter the following words the writer put in his mouth: "Some things cannot be altered, dear Doctor. We must learn to accept them as they are." Whitman was unapologetically queer (though in later life he rewrote some of his poetry to hide his queerness). Had the writer been thinking, she would have had Whitman say "You must learn…""Doctor Quack Modern Woman" shows what's wrong with projecting modern attitudes on historic events. Not only is it cheap, self-indulgent sermonizing, but it trivializes social conflicts by injecting a "modern" character who not only /embodies/, but /enforces/ the current liberal point of view. This minimizes the viewers' need to confront and consider the issue on their own."Dr Quinn" lacks the integrity to portray things "as they was". It instead concocts tales to promote the creator's point of view, rendering the stories ridiculous and risible."Ridiculous" is Byron Sully's middle name. Jane Seymour might pass for a beautiful 19th-century woman, but Joe Lando is impossibly good-looking. (Owen Wister's "The Virginian" set the standard for handsome 'pokes. Mollie's aunt reacts to a photo of the Virginian by asking "Is he really that good-looking?".) BS (how apt) takes the name of a famous Romantic poet, plus a slang version of the creator's family name.Sully destroys any claim Beth Sullivan might have for historical accuracy. "Dr Quinn" is a romance novel tarted up with Important Social Issues. It's no surprise the show's supporters are overwhelmingly female.Imagine that Sully was instead a rough-and-tumble buckskin-clad trapper, with long hair and a heavy beard, lacking not only social graces, but basic hygiene. Such men can be strikingly handsome (qv, "Prospectors") -- but not in the "cut your hair and shave every inch of your body" way modern women prefer. The inherent conflicts between him and Dr Quinn would make for much more interesting storytelling -- and an ultimately more-satisfying love story. But most female viewers wouldn't be interested.PS: "Dr Quinn" was marvelously trashed in a "Frasier" episode where Diane Chambers tells how, during a stint as a writer for the series (which is parodic in and of itself), she accidentally set Jane Seymour's hair on fire while demonstrating how to cauterize a wound with a branding iron.* The title "says it". It's /the/ greatest TV-show title ever, perfect self-parody that cannot be improved on, impaling itself on its own satirical saber.** TV is notorious for its utter disregard for historical fact. "Bat Masterson" has Bat supporting female suffrage in Wyoming when he would have been 14 years old. "The Rifleman" has Lucas helping Mark Twain recover from the death of his son -- 15 years after the child actually died.*** Note her appropriation of a male name and the implied assumption of male prerogative.

volse I cannot believe anyone would give this show a negative review, and there is only one neg review for this show on IMDb, so certainly that speaks for itself, I didn't get to watch this show during its original run on Saturday nights 93-98 and recently started watching it on INSP and GMC and found it to be so great that i bought the entire series for $60 brand new on ebay. As an avid collector of DVD's (especially classic TV shows), this is by far one of the best shows ever on TV. I was very surprised the way it tugged and brought out so many different emotions from laughing to anger to tears and I am not someone to easily get teary-eyed from TV or movies. The acting is superb by most all the actors making very very believable characters--some u love to hate. Racism being a very major part of this TV series against the blacks, indians, Chinese and most all races other than white, was a major theme for this show. The historical accuracy was superb also and anyone with any knowledge of history can vouch for that. The treatment of the Indians by the government was spot on and the show did a great job of showing those despicable acts by many of historys famous figures (Gen. Custer, Gen. Wooden were nothing short of murderers believing genocide of the Indians was the only way)including the murder of more Indian women and children than braves. Anyone giving this show some thought as to watching it please do so, it truly is superb. Being a man, I rarely care much for romance in movies and TV per say but the great on screen chemistry between Jane Seymour and Joe Lando was awesome and really made this show even better. Also the evolution of some of the townspeople character going from pure racists to acceptance of other races through the series 6 year run also gave such great credibility to the show and like i said before many many of the shows really pulled at my heartstrings while others were very funny,,,,I was very impressed with the actors portraying the townspeople and hands up to Jason Leland Adams who is a great actor playing Custer in the season 2 and 3 and joining the cast as banker Preston Lodge III seasons 4-6 (any actor that can make u despise the character they are portraying is a great actor),,superb show well worth buying the entire series,,watching the shows from the pilot through 6 seasons and the final 2 movies made all the difference in the world in coming to appreciate the highest quality of the writing, acting and explosive issues this show tackled (rape, murder, death, cancer, discrimination of race and gender, etc. etc. ,many of which are still major issues in todays time. I also appreciated the medical issues regarding diagnosis, medical equipment and medicines used in the 1860's,,,very authentic show specializing in the crucial importance of family values,,a show for all families as my whole family has benefited from watching these DVD's over and over, I have watched the entire series within 6 weeks of purchasing it and now have started rewatching and its nice how i can catch things i previously missed during my watching the series the first time.

Shiryu05 Dr. Quinn is one of those shows where you can enjoy yourself regardless of age. The show teaches values that are important regardless of your race, religion or gender ^_* My favorite characters are Sully and Hank. Sully for always standing up for what's right and Hank, well because Hank is a scarred soul where glimpses of goodness can be found if you look hard enough - i do hate the fact that Hank is horrible to his animals and on more than one occasion has abused his horse...not forgetting he makes me laugh because he's so damn cheeky.I would have to say the person I like the least, guest characters included would be Dorothy who just seems insincere to me. Dorothy is always quick to jump on the rumour wagon despite the fact that she's supposed to hunt for the truth and cast aside personal prejudices; and when she has to finally accept the truth, her apologies (or whatever) seem to stick in my throat - i would have kept Loren's sister Olive on the show instead of bringing someone like Dorothy in, who for the most part is insignificant in the larger scheme of things. I thought changing Colleen was a bad choice. Erika Flores' Colleen 'fit' the Cooper family, Jessica Bowman is a cute kid but i thought she didn't suit the part at all. Christianity plays a large part in this show but if we're looking at a western in that particular time in history, it fits.A really enjoyable show, hopefully the viewers who saw this on TV ages ago will relive good memories and the new viewers will see the huge difference between quality back then and how most of it is now