That is the question. Whether tis nobler in the mind to endure more of that "dark and mysterious" mumbo jumbo, or take up arms against a sea of negative reviews just because of the recurring villain.
I'm in an uncomfortable position with the book - on the one hand, it's a Valeyard book. I need it because the Valeyard is the best thing that ever happened to that show (now there's a sentence no one else will ever use), not to mention that I need more missions for my board game. On the other, it's Doctor Seven and Ace - and the internet is describing it as "a really dark one".
I publically profess to liking all 10 doctors more or less the same, and on most levels that's true. I cycle through random periods of "no, HE is the best" - true, some of those are longer or more intense - but it's happened at least once with every actor in the role. I remember the point at which I read Cold Fusion, 5 and 7 were my joint favourites; 6 was for the three weeks I took to watch Trial of a Timelord. 2 was for the scene with Victoria and her family in Tomb of the Cybermen. Doctor 9, I remember it exactly, was "the Oncoming Storm" moment; ditto with Doctor 10, only that was the radiation chamber conversation in Utopia. 4, instantly, Keeper of Traken. Who have I forgotten? I can't remember when I fell in love with 3, though I do recall he was, and always had been, and always would be my favourite when I read Verdegris. And as for 8, it's the "these shoes fit perfectly!" bit, which still makes me cry it's so good.
I don't even believe that a favourite doctor can be rationally chosen. "My favourite doctor" more often than not means "the one I watched when I was eight". Which is why Tom Baker still tops polls - because the voters grew up at that point. And it's true that Mr Tennant, the guy who got me into the show, does have a special position. But you can't rationally seperate a performer from his era. "I like Doctor Three best" means you are also a fan of padded 7-part epics, earthbound stories and the UNIT cast. A frequently cited comment about Colin Baker is "great Doctor, awful episodes" - proving why he's still hard to like. If you hate it when your Doctor is overwhelmed by companions, then it doesn't matter if Peter Davison acts his socks off - it still won't quite work for you.
Now I'm fortunate - I like the 1960s "Ian is the hero!" stories, and I like bases under siege, and UNIT, and "gothic horror" then "the silly ones", and I like overcrowded TARDISes, continuity heavy stories - then there's a large blip which we'll come back to in a moment - but I like experimental novels, then another blip which continues until the Master shows up.
Because if you've been paying attention to the continuity references, each of those comments refers to a particular era of Doctor, and as you'll see I'm not too picky. Except for the blips, which represent Sylvester McCoy and Christopher Eccleston. Two brilliant actors, and two of my favourite Doctors. Always have been, always will be. The problem is, I don't really like any of the 9th Doctor episodes. Some of them are good, but I don't have the same emotional connection I have for, say, Timelash - which is appalling, by the way. But crucially, I love it, and that's what is missing for 9. I don't love any of his episodes.
The problem is subtly different, and increasingly concerning with Doctor Seven, because I don't like the Cartmel Masterplan. For the uninitiated, "The Cartmel Masterplan" is not actually an episode of Doctor Who - it refers to the direction that late 80s script editor Andrew Cartmel tried to take the show. The Doctor is darker, more mysterious - in some ways, it's equivalent to Casino Royale taking Bond back to brutal basics. He reinvents the character out of the blue, back to the old man who considers bashing a guy to death with a rock in the first ever episode Unearthly Child.
I've always been in a bit of two minds about this. One of the things that I like about the Doctor is the sense of development. He is a selfish Gallifreyan at the beginning - he doesn't like humans much - and even by his 2nd incarnation, he's not exactly crusading for truth and justice. He potters around the universe and gets into trouble. It's the Third Doctor who gets into the world saving business, and only because he's stuck with UNIT and the heroism rubs off. When he finally regenerates, he thinks "enough of that!" - but even with his freedom, he can't help but help people. The Fifth Doctor is the first Doctor who goes into situations intending to save people; and you get the impression Six actually goes looking for trouble.
There are trends - increasingly moral, increasingly worried for the state of the universe, increasingly wants to be involved.
The 1980s have their own mini arc. You've got Five first, who still wanders into situations by accident, and tries to solve them in the best possible manner - failing, because the universe is just not as polite as he is. So then he regenerates into Six, who's more of a crusader and gets into trouble deliberately - and he's far more happy to get his hands dirty. He's worked out that some people - Davros, Androgums - just don't deserve mercy. And then there's Seven who, in another continuation, stops situations before they even start by planning ahead and playing the celestial puppetmaster.
He's also the man who blows up the planet Skaro, and toasting all its inhabitants in the process.
Which is impressive, when but 200 years earlier, he found himself unable to shoot Davros, and didn't have the right to erase the Daleks from history 100 years before that. There's a reason why the Fifth Doctor and Seventh Doctor don't get on in Cold Fusion - it all ends with one double crossing the other, then knocking him out with a stick and doing a runner. And it's the Fifth Doctor who is ganged up on when Six and Seven decide on extreme action in Sirens of Time. And then at the end of Time's Champion, when Six has an internal conference with his former selves, all of them think it's worth taking on the responsibility. Except one, who says "er, guys, lets think about this for a moment...". Guess who? True, multi-doctor encounters are invariably argumentative, but it's interesting how often those two in particular find it impossible to coexist on an ethical - as if they are the two extremes of the Doctor's personality. Usually, the squabbling doesn't rise beyond insulting the other's outfit and bad habits.
This in itself isn't a bad thing - I like the fact that he matures to a point where he is capable of making huge decisions with devastating consequences. I love the funny little man with the daft hat, who looks so unassuming, but has so much power and the ability to use it - the contrast is terrifying, and brilliant. And it makes sense that after that he regenerates into Paul "whoa not doing that again!" sweetness and light and bouncy hair McGann.
It's just...sometimes, the "dark and manipulative" goes a bit too far for me. It starts getting...well, Valeyardy...
Part of the problem is the Seventh Doctor is mostly mapped out in the books. All the doctors are darker in the book than on telly - in fact, one of the reasons I can't stand them is the "lets be REALLY dark mentality". In the novels, Peri's creepy stepfather is actually abusive, the Fifth Doctor abandons his coat and jumper because they are "soaked with blood", and the Eighth Doctor loses a pint per novel. In fact, it's not really a Doctor Who novel unless the Doc is tortured or beaten up at least once, and a companion gets nekkid. Some books - Genocide and Interferance come to mind - actually revolve around Doctorture. We call this "hurt/comfort", and it's nothing to be proud of.
When done well, it's OK. The problem is, it comes off as subpar fanfic much of the time. And if they've got licence to make well behaved Doctors "darker", then you can imagine just how twisted the "dark" Doctor gets.
The answer is very. Add in all the other things I hate about the books - violence, gratuitous nudity and continuity, plots based on pseudo-mystical mumbo-jumbo, all around crapness - then times it by those irritating things specific to the New Adventures - Eternals, Timelord Gods, Time's bloody Champion - and you can see why a lot of the time, Doc Seven and I don't see eye to eye.
I have a similar sort of problem with the violence in the Eighth Doctor books - but when it's just the plot, I can roll my eyes and ignore it; whereas, when it's the Doctor's character it's quite hard to dismiss so quickly. Yet lots of Doctors have had bad books written about them, and I don't go into fits of rage (OK, I do, but they're short and quickly forgotten).
No, the breaking point was the book Love and War - specifically, the bit where through some pseudo-mystical mumbo-jumbo somehow connected to the Time's Champion thing, he gets chatting with an Eternal, and decides to kill off his former self.
It's an unfortunate episode, really, because the Seventh Doctor comes out of it having joined two of my least favourite groups in the universe: he kills off a Doctor I like, and insults the Sixth Doctor ("colourful jester" indeed), while rubbing salt into Colin Baker's unfair dismissal.
It would only be worse if he did it naked, while being beaten up by three Drashigs and a Zarbi.
This one idea has made me intensely uncomfortable with the Seventh Doctor full stop, and it's made me more critical of things I could otherwise accept. Like the Ace-bullying, which is worse in the books; like the extreme and violent solutions, also worse in the books - but which I'm starting to object to more and more in the episodes.
And finally it all comes back to the Valeyard. Keep up, keep up - he's the evil future doctor, and I'm talking about why the Seventh Doctor of the books is putting me off buying a book with him in. As one of my favourite characters in the show, I've spent a lot of time thinking about him. Origins, personality, what he would be like outside Trial of a Timelord. See what you think of what I've come up with.
He would be ruthless in his pursuit of justice. While he would still have the Doctor's compunction to fix things, he would use more extreme methods and be content to let the human cost fall by the wayside. No, he'd be defending big ideas and big concepts - the purity of the web of time, for example. Remoulding the universe along his ideas of correctness.
Now, does any of this sound familiar? Obviously, there are differences - the Doctor's passion, wackiness and fire contrasts completely with his opposite's ice and rage- but it's interesting how closely my concept of the Valeyard comes to the Seventh Doctor we got.
This is even more curious when taken with Time's Champion, which theorises that the Valeyard really wanted the title. Interesting, before it gets lost in pseudo-mystical mumbo-jumbo. Or the original proposed idea to end Trial of a Timelord, having the Doctor and Valeyard fall into the Vortex, and only one of them come out - if they'd done that, and still sacked Baker II, and just had his replacement pop out - well, then it would be uncertain which had survived for the next season. Alternate, that both had melded in some way and the Seventh incarnation was an amalgam of the two.
I know what you're saying - why are you happily assuming all these not-even-vaguely-canonical ideas, when the easiest thing would be to just ignore the Love and War comment entirely, especially as I hated the rest of the book. The answer is, I don't quite know. You might as well ask why the Eighth Doctor books decide to try and rationalise the "half human" comment by deciding his Eighth incarnation alone is half human, instead of just saying "actually, that was crap - ignore it" like the rest of us do.
Which brings us back around to the original issue - I want to read Matrix, because it's got the Valeyard in it. But it also stars the Seventh Doctor and Ace, which already makes me uncomfortable, without the internet's report being "this one's REALLY dark".
And to my assertion I honestly don't have favourites and least favourites, which deserves to be qualified: "I don't have favourites (except when half way through Inferno, Pyramids of Mars etc), or least favourites. The above is null and void with reference to books, particularly New Adventures"
And then back around to Cold Fusion. It's a great book - as mentioned above, it does all sorts of things which in other circumstances would make me fume - but it's so well written, it gets away with it. Particularly the sex - god knows how they got away with it, when that little kiss in the Movie caused so much anger. The point being - you can be darker in a way that is mature, interesting and convincing.
I just wish more people would. As a student, ebay prices are an expensive gamble. And don't get me started on Just War....
No comments:
Post a Comment