Latest / A Hamster With a Blunt Penknife - a Doctor Who Commentary podcast / Discussion - (Always) Going Woke

Transcript

Discussion - (Always) Going Woke · A Hamster With a Blunt Penknife - a Doctor Who Commentary podcast

0:06
It isn't Hello I am. I'll do my former title.
0:10
I'm Doctor Paul Quinn. I'm the director of the
0:13
Chichester Centre for Fairy Tale, Fantasy and Speculative
0:16
Fiction, and this is the second part of conversation that I've
0:21
been having this week about Doctor Who and politics.
0:24
And has it all gone to woke? The first part of this
0:28
conversation was with two of my students, which will be
0:30
available online, and we'll put the details out there where you
0:34
can find them in Twitter. But I'm delighted to be joined
0:38
by my very, very old friend, perhaps my oldest friend,
0:41
certainly my oldest Doctor Who friend, Joe Ford, the leader of
0:47
a ham pham from the hamster of a blunt penknife podcast.
0:51
A man who knows more about Doctor Who.
0:53
The most living people who can actually put a sentence together
0:56
and are still emotionally continent.
0:58
And so I'm delighted to be having this very serious, proper
1:01
academic conversation with him. Unlike some of our other
1:04
conversations, which are very serious and detailed but are
1:07
more jovial, this one we're looking at politics and the Time
1:10
Lord. Joe, I'm delighted that you're
1:13
able to join me for this conversation.
1:16
You realize you are in fact responsible for me being this
1:19
obsessed and knowledgeable about Doctor Who.
1:21
And as you said a second ago, now you have become the Doctor
1:25
yourself. There's something very meta
1:29
going on here about my career choices.
1:31
I'm not going to use the word grooming because we were both
1:34
short and. You're a little older, but not
1:38
that much. The closer model, I think, is
1:40
some type of Jedi thing. And as Darth Vader says, when I
1:43
left you, I was quite a learner, and now I am and the Master, and
1:46
that's your mind. I can't believe I'm going to
1:49
reveal this to your students, but when we did use the play
1:51
Doctor Who in your garden, you in fact always were the Doctor
1:55
as well, I seem to recall. But as the as the elder of the
1:58
two of us, that's completely understandable.
2:01
I don't know that there's some weird psychoanalytical reason
2:05
for that as well, but here we are now talking about politics
2:09
and Doctor Who. So Joe, you are far more
2:11
involved with Internet fans and my my kind of a newbie with a
2:15
few followers. You have thousands of followers.
2:18
You have a reach beyond most people.
2:20
You are. You are a kind of figure within
2:22
fandom. And so you will have seen over
2:24
the last few weeks or over the last few years, as we discussed
2:28
my students and a couple of nights ago, how segments of
2:31
fandom seem to have lost their minds.
2:33
So I I wonder, just as an opening conversation opening
2:37
question, why has some sections of fandom lost its mind over
2:41
Jodie Whitties casting, Yasmin finished casting and Cutie Gap
2:46
was casting do you think? Just a huge amount of prejudice
2:50
I would say. I think these people should look
2:54
inside themselves actually and see what I mean.
2:57
The fact that they are, they've been given a platform to express
3:00
these thoughts is is a bit of a show.
3:02
But the problem with Twitter X, whatever you want to call it
3:05
these days, is that they've given everyone a voice.
3:09
And the best thing about Twitter and X and everything is that
3:12
they've given everyone a voice. Those two things are entirely
3:15
contradictory. But it just it doesn't mean that
3:18
people can shout. And some people shout very
3:22
loudly. Indeed I.
3:27
Mean this isn't going on well, certainly.
3:30
I think Whittaker's casting really did seem to put a penny
3:35
in various types of fan who maybe been quiet for a while.
3:40
I think there was a certain amount of ageism when Peter
3:44
Capaldi, Peter Paudi was cast, but I think the seismic shift
3:50
was when Georgia Whisker was cast, and that's when this
3:53
fandom divided. I'm not going to give away any
3:56
spoilers about tonight's episode, but anyone that has in
3:59
fact seen it, the giggle went out tonight and that it's quite
4:02
an important plot point. Currently recording this just in
4:06
the aftermath of The Giggle. Joe has seen it, I haven't.
4:09
Just to give you some context for that conversation and all
4:12
that reference that Joe has given you.
4:13
So if you haven't watched The Giggle, you won't.
4:15
Normally he's talking about. If you have watched The Giggle,
4:17
you will know what he's talking about.
4:19
And if you're the people who got very angry about Jodie
4:21
Whittaker, you've probably turned off by this point
4:24
already. So we're looking at a long term
4:27
Malaysian fandom, then jealousy. What do you know what?
4:30
I think the biggest problem is? Fandom comes with the fanatic.
4:33
Yeah, these people are obsessed with this show and they
4:36
absolutely have a view of what this show should be.
4:41
Yeah, that's their opinion of the show.
4:43
And if anything comes on that contradicts that, it's sort of
4:47
shatters their world. And we're in a position now
4:51
where you can anonymously go online and attack people.
4:55
That contradicts your point of view.
4:58
So it it I mean, I think. I think social media is a
5:01
wonderful thing, but it also can be a terrifying tool as well.
5:07
Is is this worse than do we think than some of the fan wars
5:11
in the in the 1980s, which ironically Chris Chibwell was
5:14
part of? When we think about the that
5:16
terrible TV performance where he turns up and he attacks season
5:20
23, Kind of a Time Lord and and hip and Jane Baker are in the
5:24
room. Oh, it's glorious, isn't it?
5:27
Pip and Jane Baker basically turn around to this ungrateful
5:29
fan who goes on to be the showrunner of Doctor Who and
5:31
say, well, I think you're very ungrateful, which is probably
5:35
what the, you know, the production team of Doctor Who
5:37
should be doing now. But unfortunately we're in a
5:39
position now where you have to play nice with everybody.
5:43
Don't though. Davis isn't playing nice at the
5:45
moment is he? He's interesting.
5:47
RTD is pushing back, having not been on Twitter for a long time.
5:50
He's now back and he is pushing back and actually they they
5:53
don't like it do they? His one word replies of tough
5:57
and and what else he said. They really don't like it, so
6:00
it's fascinating. What's so interesting about RTD
6:03
is he played it very safe during his first run, and I think he
6:07
started taking some risks as his era went along.
6:11
Since then, Steven Moffat came in, who's got possibly the
6:14
biggest pair of balls in Doctor Who and did lots of really
6:18
interesting, controversial things.
6:21
Then Chipnall came along and everyone thought he'd probably
6:23
play it safe, the safest of all, and did the most controversial
6:26
thing about. So now Davis knows, right?
6:27
I can get away with this and the show can still be successful and
6:31
I've got this massive studio behind me and and now he's just
6:34
going, that's back in the day. What did he do?
6:36
He, he equated, you know, politicians to being, you know,
6:40
gassy windbags and you know, he turned the master into, you
6:47
know, raining bombs down onto the earth.
6:50
A bit like Tony Blair, if I look a bit like Tony Blair didn't
6:53
mean the sound of drums. But nowadays, you know he can
6:55
put something like a trans character front and centre and
6:59
make it a part of the show and ride the controversy of the
7:03
reaction to it as well, yes. And and not care I I see, I see
7:08
today there's a there are 100 or so complaints about the Sabis
7:12
who've gone into the BBC. 7 million viewers, yes.
7:16
That's not a high percentage, is it?
7:18
No. Which indicates the people who
7:20
are losing their minds about. I mean, I I see a particular
7:22
shop in North America, I think of probably in in in in legal
7:27
peril, I think where they start talking about Jimmy Savile in
7:29
relation to the current theme and a very popular homosexual
7:36
musician with a very long career.
7:38
I I I think throwing around this Jimmy Savile accusation is part
7:41
of a kind of grotesque discourse around trans, as one of my
7:45
students said. That's right, trans trans men
7:49
are invisible. Trans women are predators.
7:51
Or is it the other way around? But it's kind of part of this
7:53
kind of this fear of the unknown or or they don't understand
7:57
something that slips outside their kind of binary
7:59
understanding. And here it is on Saturday night
8:01
in a in a television program that people are very, very
8:04
engaged with. But that level of kind of anger
8:09
and hatred almost, and hatred in some instances, it seems to be
8:14
pulling against the spirit of the show that they
8:15
professionally fans of. It's a very, very awesome it's.
8:18
Really, really weird. And what what I found most
8:21
interesting about that was then Russell went on to the after
8:25
show, doesn't it? What?
8:26
I forget what it's called now. The Doctor Who unleashed with
8:30
Yasmin Finney and said no. What we're trying to do is
8:33
normalise this for young children so they don't grow up
8:38
to be these biggars, you know? It sounds sort of menacing to
8:42
say get them while they're young, but get them while
8:44
they're young with a positive message.
8:46
That's what he's trying to do. I mean, what what's interesting
8:49
for those who don't watch the video with myself, a couple of
8:53
my students, One of my students is non binary and a lesbian and
8:58
the other is bisexual and they're not convinced by the
9:01
writing of the Star Beast. They think it's a bit two
9:04
points, a bit on the nose. They they they welcome the
9:07
sentiment. They welcome the inclusive
9:10
nature of it, but they don't know the writing of it.
9:11
And I I was really fascinated by that response as a sis white
9:16
centrist dad figure. I was really amazed by that
9:21
because I thought this is. Great.
9:22
No, I've I've seen it quite a bit.
9:24
I've seen quite a few people online, and especially in fact I
9:27
saw more comment online about Davros no longer being a
9:32
disabled villain from people who are disabled, saying I find this
9:38
really offensive. But I think, do you know what I
9:40
think if you're going to do this, if you're going to make
9:43
the bold step to make a positive statement about this and you're
9:46
going to tie it, it's not just like a scene, you're actually
9:48
going to tie it into the plot. So the climax of the story
9:52
pivots around this idea. You are going to risk pissing
9:57
off. You know the wrong people as
9:59
words. The right people.
10:01
I mean the Davros one, those responses, they they challenge
10:04
me. I I thought Davis was right.
10:06
Well, no. Two things.
10:07
I think Davros has become a really boring character and
10:10
there's nothing else to do with him.
10:11
And all you can really do is what Big Finisher already done,
10:13
which is going to his past and what Moffett tries to do in
10:18
Series 9. And then, once you have Davos
10:21
pulled out of his wheelchair, he's lying prone on the floor.
10:24
I mean, I still think that's the most I'll judged moment in the
10:27
new series. Unbelievable.
10:29
But child Davros, there's something interesting there.
10:32
But big fish done it properly. Or they've already done it with
10:35
with with Terry Malone, there's a Don't.
10:37
Don't bother with Davros. What else can you say about him?
10:39
Anyway, it's good to have him back in Series 9.
10:43
I'm sorry to his four, but really, he warps the Dykes for
10:48
the second-half of Classic Hoop, and there's really of his five
10:51
appearances, only three of them you've won Genesis and
10:56
Revelation and Remembrance, Rememberance.
11:00
Yeah, I mean, but if you can, like he covers it in a line and
11:04
that doesn't, he says basically all time is in flux and so this,
11:07
this, that's your sort of getting away with it.
11:10
This is why he's walking again to do something more interesting
11:15
with the character, to just not go down the same beats.
11:18
Why shouldn't you do that? I don't think it's.
11:20
I mean he he's on record as saying, you know, we don't want
11:25
to project negative stereotypes for people who are disabled, but
11:29
ultimately it's just interesting direction to take the character
11:33
in. I mean what was interesting then
11:35
online was when when they saw Ruth Madeley in the Star piece
11:39
that then and they got very agitated that her wheelchair
11:43
had. Though 11 fella, the the tweet
11:47
that got the most traction was one fella when you know, how
11:51
dare they have her cross her legs because disabled people
11:55
can't do that. And suddenly that was being
11:57
shared far and wide by Ruth Madeley herself.
12:00
I think Twitter then did put one of their corrections on it as
12:04
well. So not only did he make a fool
12:06
of Twitter made a fool of them which is which is fascinatingly
12:08
you can you can go so far wrong. Twitter will correct you given
12:12
the current regime running it. So it's been it's been.
12:15
Yes, I think the current issue live is from the children in
12:21
need special. But the current issue kind of as
12:27
part of a wider discourse goes back to Whitaker and I think.
12:31
And it is these group of mainly men, mainly white, mainly in
12:35
their 40s and 50s, so like me but not me, and then really not
12:40
happy with the show turning into what they think is something
12:43
woke. And yet, you wonder, what have
12:46
they been watching for the last 60 years?
12:48
Why is the word woke weaponized? Because I just think it's a
12:52
wonderful thing. Yeah, I don't understand.
12:55
I mean it. I had conversations with friends
12:58
of ours. Who?
12:59
Who? They moved down to Cornwall, and
13:01
they were in Cornwall. They were isolated all during
13:04
lockdown and they emerged with some quite odd ideas.
13:07
And I do wonder if they radicalize themselves and they
13:09
won't woke really angry about woke.
13:11
They're in the medical professions.
13:13
They looked at people transitioning and who then
13:17
regretted the decision so that. But that's a different
13:19
conversation. You see that's entirely
13:21
different. But this kind of generalized
13:22
woke and you claps it into and woke I can see is that you're
13:26
not a racist. You're accepting.
13:28
It's acceptance. That's what wokeness is.
13:30
But for some reason, it's just, it's this label, yeah, that's
13:34
been given for everything that's wrong with being progressive
13:37
and, you know, progressive. Is the issue is and and how far
13:41
then Doctor Who has always had this kind of progressive
13:44
instinct within it and what have they watched.
13:46
I mean, I mean in a sense this conversation which we discussed
13:50
in October we planned for October didn't quite work out
13:52
because of course we clashed with the universities Carol
13:56
concert which raised some eyebrows by people who were
13:58
going to come and definitely weren't going to the current
14:00
concert. And in a sense, Toby Haddock, he
14:02
has preempted this with his his section on news night where he
14:07
looked at it and Tim Stanley was on there.
14:09
But there's a wider conversation and a more detailed discussion
14:12
we had about doctor and and progressiveness because it is it
14:15
is there, isn't it. I haven't imagined that, I mean.
14:17
But he's so brilliantly. I mean, that section on News
14:20
Night was so brief. He's so brilliantly with such
14:23
brevity, pointed out all those moments in the classic Doctor
14:27
Who series where it was quite a quite woke.
14:32
It's always been there. Yes.
14:34
I mean it's not been always the dominant mode within it but I I
14:39
think you'd certainly look to when Cartmell is is script
14:42
editors and Cartmell famously says doesn't he?
14:46
When when asked what does he want to do with the with the
14:49
job, he says he wants to be under government, doesn't he?
14:51
Which is late stage Thatcherism. And certainly you can see 25 and
14:57
26 have got clear political stories and and a Cliff
15:02
underlying political awareness that you don't see maybe in 22
15:06
and 23. It's so sad in 89 that the show
15:10
comes off the air because it's getting racially very
15:13
progressive as well. Look at Battlefield, which is a
15:15
a story which is entirely mixed race, isn't it?
15:18
Yes, I mean there's the joke about 25 that they have black
15:24
characters in every story, but in every story bar remembers the
15:28
dykes. They're associated with music,
15:30
particularly rap or jazz, and the idea that that's what black
15:32
people do. And then in remembrance, you
15:35
have in Harry's tea bar, you have the Night staff.
15:42
He's a black man talking about slavery.
15:44
But the wider the point is you wouldn't see those faces in
15:48
Doctor Who even a year previously, and certainly not
15:51
two years, three years, four years, five years previously.
15:54
Here you've got it within the cast.
15:57
Just to show how much he's trying to make a point, Carmel
16:01
says in an interview. That's that.
16:03
No coloured sign that I sees on the window in the hostel.
16:08
They wanted to cut it out and he said no, don't you dare.
16:11
That's the point of the story, yeah.
16:14
You know, he came and see the bit where he makes Johnson Power
16:17
rewind the tape, doesn't he? How he's ordering sandwiches.
16:20
That you weren't watching watch this bit, yeah.
16:23
I mean, certainly he goes back, doesn't even remember.
16:26
It's the idea of the Daleks interracial purity, so naturally
16:29
their ally is some Neo Nazis. And this army Sergeant that Ace
16:34
is in love with? Potentially he's a Neo Nazi and
16:37
it introduces Ace's intersection with early 80s, mid 80s race
16:43
and. I don't know how explicit it is
16:47
in the story, but you can certainly infer you know a
16:51
homosexual reading into the Happiness Patrol as well.
16:55
Yes, absolutely. I mean I I I think I think it's
16:59
tap wood in in about time that talks about Section 28 and and
17:03
and that's the year of Section 28.
17:06
But there had been agitation about what they think is
17:11
happening in school which leads to Section 28 in the year
17:14
previously. So I think it's difficult to
17:18
make the case that on one level this isn't about Section 28 and
17:21
about attempts to criminalize or silence homosexuality.
17:25
Criminalize is wrong, but certainly silence homosexuality
17:30
in schools and the wider public. I showed happiness Patrolson
17:33
students a couple of weeks ago, and so I actually looked up
17:37
Section 28 in greater detail and 71% of Labour voters in 1988
17:43
thought homosexuality was intrinsically wrong.
17:46
Wow. And that's the progressive part.
17:50
And so that shows you what's been pushed against there in a
17:52
program which is certainly in kind of all the pink.
17:55
I mean it's. You've got the you've got the
17:57
plainclothes policeman, haven't you, out on the street trying to
17:59
trap, you know, people into saying the right things?
18:03
And like, I mean, obviously it's a part of a wider discourse
18:06
about late sage statutories. Yeah, you've got the strikers
18:11
coming into the city that they're going to, The snipers
18:13
are going to kill. And you've got this, this kind
18:15
of piercing interrogation of capitalism.
18:19
What does the Candy Man do? He makes sweets that are so good
18:22
they kill people. I mean, I I love Happiness
18:24
Patrol. I know it's not always a popular
18:26
opinion and certainly at the time people thought it was
18:29
actually gone very real wrong. But I I think it, I think it's
18:31
brilliant. I think, I think to have Berkey
18:33
Bassett on acid killing people, because that's not the idea in
18:38
the script and in the book. Of course, it's a kind of
18:40
stereotypical scientist with big glasses and a white jacket, a
18:44
bow tie. And the first time he wrote
18:45
something wrong is he cuts his finger off, doesn't he?
18:47
And then he just sticks. Another thing wrong because he's
18:49
made of marzipan. But I I love that and I think
18:53
it's it's and is he Andrew S who's executed.
18:56
That's the reading. That's the that's the the gay
18:59
man who's being killed by the state.
19:02
And look, as I recall, it's something about him writing
19:04
poetry, which of course is another stereotype about, you
19:07
know, the poetry is only loved by flamboyant young men.
19:12
But I think it is something is going on there in that test and
19:15
in the book in particular. You skip forward to Kirsten
19:18
Fenrick and it's not there because they didn't let him do
19:20
it. But Ian Briggs absolutely wanted
19:22
to tell the story of Alan Turing, didn't he?
19:25
And it But in the book he does have that Judson's injuries
19:30
called by Millington, who cripples him during a rug.
19:32
Oh, he's watching another boy, isn't he?
19:35
On the field. And so you.
19:37
This whole kind of rookie and discourse around the beautiful
19:40
boy. And because they can't actually
19:44
act on their natural impulses, they they kind of kill it.
19:47
I mean, what's interesting is if you read something like Robert
19:50
Graves is Goodbye to All That, which is a First World War
19:53
narrative and Graves has this, this amazing stat that he
19:57
probably makes up with. Graves is a great lie of course,
19:59
as he admits that 80% of public school boys are gay in one shape
20:03
or the other because it's a closed institution where the
20:05
only woman is matron. So kind of maternal figure and
20:08
therefore you can't act out on your sexual desires there
20:11
because it's the theatable instinct and so you get lots of
20:16
same sex relationships. Similarly in the Army, you know,
20:18
in the First World War was great concern in the War Office that
20:22
there's homosexuality in the trenches because they
20:25
misunderstand homosexuality versus homosexuality and I
20:28
think. Briggs has picked up on that and
20:31
has that in in that section now. I think I don't I don't
20:35
understand the great love for cursory.
20:38
I never have even 30 years down the line.
20:40
But I can see what he's doing in that book and I see what he's
20:43
doing in in the television and it, and it certainly is, I think
20:47
about a homosexual relationship. Let's not say baby steps and
20:51
let's say this show was making big strides in those last couple
20:54
of years. The trouble with it is, is no
20:57
one was watching at that point and the show was an
20:59
embarrassment to the BBC that they wanted rid of.
21:02
Now it is an institution, It is one of the most watched shows on
21:06
television. It is on people's lips.
21:08
So if you if you put these messages front and centre now
21:13
it's going to get some attention.
21:15
If you look back at Whitaker's Rock and where people seem to
21:18
get agitated, set aside the gang who will never accept a female
21:22
doctor. Where people really seem to get
21:25
agitated was all from 55 and practices because of the
21:29
environmental mess. The speech at the end of all
21:32
from 55 is kind of unnecessary because it's quite clear I love
21:36
Auckland 55. I think it's an yeah.
21:38
I do too. It's it's got 101 ideas, doesn't
21:41
it? Moves like a lick.
21:42
It feels like McCoy era stuff. I think the way that she
21:46
effectively looks out the screen at the audience, yeah, you're
21:50
just going to piss people off doing that, you know, because
21:53
people feel as if they're getting a lecture.
21:55
But you know what I mean? I wrote in my review, I've got a
21:57
review website. It was like, no, we need this.
22:00
We need to be bloody lectured that you reason you don't like
22:03
it, It's because you're not doing the things you should be
22:06
doing. It's a reminder of the things
22:08
you should be doing and you're not.
22:10
I mean, I watched practice there a few weeks ago.
22:12
It was late at night. I was, I was eyeing the
22:14
children's close to school. I'd forgotten just how well shot
22:18
that is. I mean beautiful.
22:20
It's very expensive, isn't? It in a way that you don't often
22:23
see it. It looks like a film, but of
22:25
course it's about plastics, which is very on the on the
22:29
money and is an important thing and it's something we can all
22:32
work on. And I do wonder if the Ferrari
22:34
around those two is dark money. As I said the other night said
22:39
anyone who watches both of these lectures will hear me say this,
22:41
make the same point twice. Is there something going on?
22:43
But the fossil fuel section who are clearly putting money into
22:51
think tanks in this country who've got access to websites,
22:54
newspapers, Twitter and that, they are attacking anything that
22:58
looks like it's making a case for the environment and for
23:01
environmentalism. And I think that's partly what's
23:03
going on with those two stories. Because in and of themselves,
23:07
even if you ignore the environmental message, which you
23:09
shouldn't do, which you could do apart from the very end of
23:12
Walton, they're really good episodes.
23:14
They're really strong episodes. They're well written, they're
23:16
well acted, They look in practice, beautiful.
23:19
You know, the bleakest thing about that episode was, you
23:22
know, you know the section where the two vloggers discover all
23:26
the rubbish in that beautiful setting.
23:29
And then later on there's a a shot of as it guy, as they're
23:31
called, you know, in the water where all the plastic gathers in
23:36
the water. And I'm like, that doesn't have
23:37
me in real life. So I googled it and I was, oh
23:40
shit, this really does happen in real life.
23:43
And do you know what? This might seem ridiculous, but
23:46
I went out and bought a recycling bin afterwards.
23:48
It it, it had its impacts. I I think the issue is that if
23:51
you if you say something in the context of environmentalism and
23:55
it's proven to be wrong or exaggerated, it then is used to
24:01
dismiss the message. So I think anyone associated
24:03
with the BBC have learnt the message, the learnt the lesson
24:06
of something like the monocle moved near from 86 McGann.
24:10
Paul Megann, a great doctor let's remind ourselves he plays
24:15
this figure in the First World War and the BB CS publicly said
24:20
it was a real story and then of course the right wing press
24:22
discovered that it wasn't a true story.
24:24
So they attempt to dismiss the whole story and I think there's
24:27
something, there's a lesson been learned there that you have to
24:29
base this in reality. It's like Doom Watch, which I
24:33
think we can see because that's where we're going.
24:35
I think back this environmentalism is there in
24:37
Purpley. So what are these people who are
24:39
attacking Whitaker's run through an environmental message or
24:42
ignoring what Purpley said? Well, that that was obviously
24:45
the greatest parallel and the thing that the people that liked
24:48
the messages were bringing up. You know, go watch Invasion of
24:50
the Dinosaurs, where the 3rd Doctor says that again, You
24:53
know, it's it's not this that destroys the wild Brigadier, You
24:57
know, it's it's human greed. You know, it's very and he's
25:00
basically staring out the screen.
25:02
But, you know, we can we can live with that because that's
25:03
John Purwin, We love him and we can't handle JD Whitaker doing
25:06
it because she's a woman. What's yours is you go to Terror
25:11
of the Autumns, which is a story all about in the Purwi era.
25:16
It doesn't touch on it at all. But it's working in a different
25:19
way of course, isn't it? I mean homes is going over to
25:22
scare people about what's in their houses what's their it's
25:26
in the one of the DWMI think the plastic chairs were ever in 1971
25:32
and so per Holmes takes what's actually in people's living room
25:37
and makes it kill them. But Holmes I'm not sure is a
25:40
politically political right. I think the the the clearly
25:44
political figure writing for the public and.
25:47
Hulk. Yeah, because of the comments.
25:50
And actually, do, you know, I don't think the most the
25:52
strongest political statement is on TVI.
25:55
Think. It's Hulk's novelisation of the
25:57
doomsday weapon, which depicts the Earth in the future in the
26:03
most chilling way imaginable, where we no longer go outside.
26:07
We're allotted, what, half an hour to go and sit in the
26:10
sunshine? Everyone's living in tiny
26:13
spaces. The whole planet's surface has
26:15
been utterly polluted. As a cautionary message, it
26:19
certainly makes this point. I mean, I I love Connolly in
26:22
space, the TV version. Yeah, me too.
26:24
Me too. I don't think The Master needs
26:25
to be in it, actually. I think IMC are the villains and
26:28
I think that's the point that's being made there.
26:30
And it's kind of watered down when you have Delgado much
26:32
annoys. I love Delgado, I don't think he
26:34
needs to be in there, but the book is astonishingly bleak.
26:36
But it's the vision of the future Doctor Who runs with
26:39
Thereafter which is we spoke about on on a previous podcast
26:43
about how that's your touch point that those those three
26:46
future Earth stories in per week.
26:49
So currently in space the mutants and and frontier in
26:53
space are where Doctor Who keeps coming back to that and the idea
26:56
of the 51st century has been stepping off point.
26:58
But I think that vision of an Earth that's worn out by
27:01
industry and people have just become economic units and even
27:04
when they try and escape into space into the high frontier and
27:07
you know that I know should go West or around go West, that
27:10
industry is going to follow them.
27:11
I think it's such a compelling narrative that that is a story
27:14
we should still be looking at. Very telling, then, that when
27:16
you skip across to invasion of the dinosaurs, you have a
27:19
sequence of Sarah in the learning room where she's
27:22
effectively given a lecture on environmentalism.
27:26
But it makes this point. Yes, yes.
27:29
I mean that that's an interesting story in that
27:32
they're well meaning, but the the narrative suggests they're
27:35
misguided, which kind of rejects that kind of Hulk Ian MO, but I
27:38
think is Hulk help by that stage.
27:41
Do you know it's gorgeous though, don't you think?
27:44
Clearly, Terrorist? Dick says.
27:45
You know, he Hulk was staunchly left wing, but he'd been
27:49
involved with some, let's say extreme left wingers that
27:53
frightened him. So he played Plants them front
27:56
and centre in that story as the villains of the piece.
27:59
It's that line that Terrace, Dick says about what is it?
28:01
Yes, of course. You know, we're going to control
28:03
you and we're going to roll back time, but we're doing it all for
28:05
your own good. I mean, I think what's
28:09
interesting there in certainly in PERT where you're looking at
28:11
the post war consensus and you still got a broadly centrist
28:15
vision that everyone's working together.
28:17
And of course, by the time you get into Lake Baker, you've got
28:21
the Monetarists have essentially taken over the Tories, and
28:24
they're proposing a very, very different narrative.
28:27
Suddenly we're doing gags on tacks.
28:29
Yeah, I mean, I don't. I think Tack Wood and Lawrence
28:33
Miles in About Time are right about Sun makers.
28:38
I think Tim Stanley on News Night trying to rebut Haddocky
28:41
by looking at Sun Makers is wrong because that's a very
28:45
confused story. I don't, I don't have a great
28:48
deal of time with Sun Makers. I'll be honest.
28:49
And again, I know the received wisdom seems to be that it's
28:53
gone under revision and it and it's very, very good.
28:55
But I think Woods and Miles are right.
28:58
There's a confusion there about who you're paying tax to and do
29:01
you want to pay tax? If the argument is too much tax
29:04
is wrong, that's one thing. But if the argument is tax at
29:07
all is bad, that's kind of a libertarian argument, which is
29:11
playing into some of the arguments that are doing the
29:13
rounds in the Tory party. But Thatcher is in charge at
29:15
this point. Powell has been essentially
29:18
destroyed himself, but he'd been the key figure in the monstrous
29:20
in the 60s. But Thatcher and Keith Joseph,
29:23
who's also destroyed himself, of course, by by proposing what
29:26
looked like eugenics. Thatcher is the bastion of and
29:29
the standard bearer of monetarism and a kind of rolling
29:33
back the state and rolling back sensation.
29:35
And she's in charge by this point and you're really looking
29:37
into it's always counter two years ago well you're you're
29:42
7779 is inevitable it wasn't it. I mean election 78 would be
29:45
different, but I I have problems with Holmes is right now.
29:48
I don't think it's quite as left wing and progressive.
29:50
People, I think the jokes soften the blow.
29:53
It's not angry enough. Yeah, yeah.
29:56
I think the kind of Kenneth Williams S performance of the
29:59
gather problem there as well. I think Stanley is wrong when he
30:02
talks about that. The The Collector has got Dennis
30:06
Healey's eyebrows. I think that's just really
30:08
reaching on the part of somebody who's broadly centre right, Who
30:11
loves Doctor Who and wants to make Doctor Who centre right.
30:13
As a criticism of Thatcher, happiness for trouble is much
30:17
better because they dare to make her a sympathetic character.
30:21
She's got layers. Yeah, I think Holmes when he
30:23
comes back to politics in 84 with Kaiser Androzzani is more
30:28
clearly engaged with mid period Thatcherism.
30:32
So you've got the reference to the fact she's been closed down
30:35
in the West and the work has been moved to the camps in the
30:37
East. Morgus is clearly some type of
30:41
hyper Thatcherist figure. So I think he's much better on
30:44
it at that point in time and as a as a satire as well.
30:47
And I think because say Ward is script editor at that point and
30:52
and he's looking towards a satirical future.
30:56
I think in in Revelation of Dialects there's a sense which
30:59
there's a meeting of minds there in in 84 when they're working on
31:02
case Andrezzani. I'm not sure that Sun Makers is
31:05
quite the progressive text that people wanted to be but I'm not
31:09
sure how political Holmes is for most of his run.
31:12
I can't see it. Maybe the two Doctors.
31:16
He's having a pop there at the meteors.
31:18
Yeah, the problem, of course, as we as we've said previously, did
31:23
costume department ruin that narrative?
31:26
Well, and I think as well J&T had a hand in it because John,
31:30
what's his name, John Stratton, gives such a great performance.
31:35
I'm completely on his side throughout, even though he wants
31:37
to, you know, kill and eat everybody.
31:40
I mean, what happens in Two Dots is interesting because it is
31:43
meant to be. You're meant to be Jamie being
31:45
treated as meat and therefore think about how you're treating
31:48
meat. But because Shock Eye doesn't
31:51
look alien enough, and there's a weird kind of homoerothicism in
31:55
it, because he wants to eat Jamie, he's not really as
31:58
interested in Perry. And then he knocks out Perry and
32:02
goes Pity, it's not a joke. And so there's there's odd.
32:06
Things And what conclusion do we draw from this, from this story?
32:10
You know, let's let's be vegetarians.
32:12
That's not really a solution, is he?
32:14
I mean, yeah, I mean, at the end of the script is meant to
32:17
summarize what Holmes wants to do.
32:19
And I don't know, I think, I think it's too long.
32:22
I think the sun and an element to it that kind of is is muting
32:27
or reducing that that anti meat eating.
32:30
And the problem is because this cannibalism in a number of other
32:34
scripts, in 22 it just looks like another cannibalistic text,
32:38
and so it loses that that meaning.
32:40
And so 22 looks broadly apolitical.
32:44
But look at these instances peppered throughout the run.
32:47
Yeah. It's there.
32:49
Yes people. People say it's God woke.
32:51
Yeah, it's. Always been, oh, you know, as
32:53
far back as and you talk about progressive having the black
32:56
astronaut in the the 10th planet, you know that was hugely
33:00
progressive for the time. Yeah, I mean, 10th Planet is an
33:02
interesting example of where things are clearly shifting
33:06
under in its law, and it's a world that William Hartley can't
33:09
be part of any. We're suddenly very
33:11
international on every base we go to from that point on, yeah.
33:15
Which is realistic. The problem, of course, is then
33:17
you've got two of the sidemen, which returns to stereotypes
33:21
around black characters and Arabic characters, where they're
33:26
the villains. Toberman can barely speak.
33:28
I think I'm saying that he's meant to be mute or he's meant
33:31
to be deaf and a deaf mute. But then when he speaks, it's a
33:34
kind of gutter, gutter, old single word.
33:38
And he fulfills this kind of terrible stereotype of the giant
33:42
and and also cliches around the black man, which you've got with
33:45
Kemal as well, of course. That's it 2 back-to-back.
33:47
It's like they're opening a door and then they're slamming it
33:50
shut again. So frustrating, yeah, but there
33:53
are attempts. Oh, absolutely, Yeah.
33:56
Let's give them credit. I mean, they've moved away from
33:59
blacking up that you find in Marco Polo and that you find in
34:02
the Crusade, which is an interesting people always look
34:05
to the Crusade. It's an I'm bit pentameter, so
34:08
it's kind of more sophisticated. Well, it is, but you still got
34:10
Bernard Hill browned up, and I'm not sure that Saladin and the
34:14
people around him, or anything other than the kind of stock
34:17
villains that you'd expect in this type of discourse.
34:19
I'll tell you what, tying this back to social media, I think
34:22
the worst conversation I ever had with somebody was about the
34:26
abominable snowman animation, where, you know, and I saw that
34:31
the BFI and Gary Russell stood up and, you know, an old school
34:35
Doctor Who fan, Jeremy Bentham, you know, very big circle, all
34:38
in the sort of Lavinish circles, said, you know, how why did you
34:43
do this, you know? And Gareth was like, are you
34:46
kidding? We, we are literally trying to
34:49
make this more accessible for people now.
34:51
The same reason we put it into colour, you know, the same
34:54
reason why we occasionally take scenes out, it's because we want
34:57
to make this a product that people can watch today.
35:00
And I had a conversation with somebody online where I asked
35:03
the question because they were fighting this argument and I
35:06
said, do you want them to animate somebody where it looks
35:11
like they've got tape on their eyes to make them Asian?
35:14
And they said yes. Yeah, it's a it's been a strange
35:20
few months, hasn't it? Because this week with Celestial
35:24
Toymaker back in the fans vision defences of the use of the N
35:32
word when I yeah, I'd forgotten the N word is there in that
35:34
script and of course that's that's accounting, right?
35:38
It's not in the script, you know, that was that was ad
35:41
libbed by the actor. I learned that from Toby
35:43
Haddock's recent podcast on The Celestial Talk.
35:47
That's. Worse again then, isn't it it?
35:50
Is. Whether you'll die on that hill,
35:52
that it should be in there because you shouldn't erase
35:54
history. But this isn't history.
35:55
This is a kind of disposable piece of television which has a
35:58
spurious reputation for greatness which most people have
36:01
rejected once they saw that 4th episode.
36:03
And when you read the kind of convoluted journey between
36:08
original Commission and it's actually turned up on the TV or
36:12
the George and Margaret business, the kind of very
36:14
polite, middle class version of Waiting for God I it's not
36:19
actually that good. But of course, you know the fact
36:20
they've now removed the word celestial from the title.
36:23
They have, and it wasn't mentioned once in the giggle.
36:25
Well, it's interesting. I I can't think of a time where
36:28
celestial is used as a euphemism for Orient.
36:30
No, I said that to my partner so that I said why are we making
36:34
that collection? I just figured celestial men,
36:37
you know? Yeah, it's.
36:40
Very. It's interesting now, partly I
36:43
think it's probably was reflective of another debate
36:45
which people get very up about, which is talents when trying.
36:49
Oh boy, I knew we was going to go there.
36:51
Have. To go there, I I mean, I had a
36:53
very civilized conversation online about it a few nights ago
36:57
and out whether it's controversial.
36:59
Yes, it is. I suspect part of the issue is
37:02
because it is such a ballast today and because it's by Robert
37:05
Holmes, people really don't want to criticize it.
37:07
But you can't get around the fact there's yellowing up
37:10
people. There is.
37:11
Should I? Weird enough that offsets me
37:14
less than the portrayal of the bulk of the Chinese characters
37:18
as villains. That bothers me more.
37:21
Because the old argument used to be while Lee Sen Chang doesn't
37:24
use that kind of stereotype speech impediment when he's away
37:28
from Westerners. Or.
37:29
He plays the role the Westerners would expect.
37:32
But actually when you go back to the script and again somebody
37:35
tried to defend this little man and four other little men
37:38
because Tom Baker, 6 foot three, what are you talking about?
37:41
The notion of littleness and Chinese is essentially connected
37:45
throughout all of these texts, and it's a type of stereotype.
37:48
The old argument wasn't it that Holmes took such a vast array of
37:52
texts, Sherlock Holmes, Phantom of the Opera intersecting with
37:59
the Jack the Ripper and Fu Manchu, and parodies Pastiches
38:04
and criticizes it. But I don't think that's the
38:05
case because the the yellowing up immediately makes it one of
38:09
those texts. But within the script itself,
38:12
each one of those texts, I mean, I think, I think the more recent
38:15
work that's been done around the Jack roofer's victims in that
38:18
book, the fine that that brilliant book, the fine, even
38:21
that does damage to homes. Because in that section in I
38:25
think it's episode 4 where Leeson Chang is stalking the
38:29
streets and he meets was clearly a prostitute.
38:34
If we look at the five, most Jack Roofer's victims weren't
38:37
sex workers. Two of them had taken sex work
38:40
on for economic reasons, but most of them are just women.
38:43
But they're constructed. The sex workers in the
38:46
journalism of the day, in the central Proto Tabloidism or the
38:49
other journalism. And how we as a society, as the
38:54
police, then in the late 70s, Jack the Ripper treat sex
38:58
workers versus normal women, turns the conversation away from
39:05
their victimhood to suggest they were asking for it.
39:07
So I think even that he's a problematic in that text.
39:10
I mean, I used to love talents One Train.
39:12
I still love it, but I think it's a deeply problematic text.
39:15
I did it. What I watched one of our
39:17
dinosaurs is missing over Christmas for the first time
39:20
ever, which has some of the most troubling yellow face I've ever
39:24
seen in my life. And the performance?
39:26
Good grief. Talk about offensive.
39:28
Yes, it taught me that actually there are degrees of
39:31
offensiveness with yellow. And at least with the talents of
39:34
Wing Chiang, you have John Bennett giving a very layered,
39:38
very nuanced performance. He is a sympathetic character
39:42
that's risen up the ranks due to the power he's given, like
39:46
there's more there than than just being offensive there.
39:50
There's there. There is some depth to it.
39:53
I mean as late as 1980, I think when they do a kind of
39:56
prestigious Foo Manchu with Peter Houston off, he does
40:00
yellow art and of course four years later and passage when
40:04
you're in a in a in a proper film.
40:07
Like you're meant to treat her respectfully as, as an
40:10
adaptation of a classic Alec Guinness Browns Up.
40:16
I mean, when I say four was, was there no Asian actor of that
40:19
stature and that age, you could have played that role.
40:21
You had to get Alec Guinness to Brown.
40:23
Wasn't it you that told me they were off doing gangsters or
40:25
something? Else I think somebody seemed to
40:27
confirm that online the other night and they said, I'm not
40:29
sure, but I I think there's something to.
40:31
That was the pool that small. It potentially it's.
40:36
I mean it's not as small as it was in 64 from Marco Polo but it
40:40
is it's small but there are actors there so unless they were
40:44
all up round people filming gangsters then you do have to
40:47
have John Bennett. But I I don't know.
40:49
It doesn't. It doesn't sit well with me
40:51
given given that you've had Robots of Death the week before,
40:55
which by the standards of the time has a very diverse cast.
41:00
In that you have a woman of colour and you have an Asian man
41:02
within that cast. To then slip back into this kind
41:07
of yellow perilous dialogue discourse with yellowing up and
41:13
even setting that aside, the vision of the tongue as this
41:16
kind of yellow peril. So to reuse the phrase and that
41:21
you know is there something going on there around the the
41:23
the Opium Wars. Is this Holmes, given this kind
41:25
of totalized vision of of late Victorian London Maybe it is.
41:29
But couldn't you have cast one of the actors playing the
41:31
Cooley's to be Lee St. Chan?
41:34
You remember Major daily in Carnival of Monsters?
41:38
Yes, I'll figure out he was sort of Robert Holmes.
41:41
You know, like that's Robert Holmes actually in A story.
41:45
Yes, yes, I think, I think that's right.
41:48
I I I I love hoes. I think he has five or six stone
41:51
cold classics, but I don't I I. Love Terrence Dicks, but he
41:55
makes no secret of the fact that he wishes the Empire was back.
41:59
You know, and things have gone a bit, you know, we're being very
42:01
liberal with the ladies these days and things like, you know,
42:04
he's a fantastic writer but problematic.
42:06
And the question is, can you separate the work he's producing
42:11
from the person that he is? I mean, I forget what podcasts,
42:17
not podcasts. What DVD documentary is that
42:21
Damian Collins MP is on and makes the case that Trouton is
42:25
essentially a type of neo con. There are corners of the
42:29
universe that produce the most terrible evils and they must be
42:31
fought. And then what you find is some
42:33
going around slaughter and Ice warriors with with abandoning in
42:36
Seeds of Death. And I think there is something
42:38
to that as well. But again, it's how the
42:41
programme changes once you get into Series 4.
42:45
And it's not really trying to be whatever it wants to be.
42:49
It wants to be what's on ITV or ATV at that point.
42:52
And therefore you have a more assertive kind of killer doctor
42:56
almost or or what you can do within the conflicts of of of
43:00
the characters. Within the structure of the show
43:02
there, suddenly it's very formulaic.
43:03
It's doing the American thing, you know, of having a season of
43:06
very similarly told stories. Yes, I mean what's notable
43:11
there? But again, it's it's the mid
43:13
60s. What to expect, how, how, how
43:15
infrequently you find people of colour, although an enemy of the
43:19
world. For real.
43:21
Yeah, and she's a fascinating character.
43:24
She really. I mean, I mean, I think that's
43:26
the great discovery there 10 years ago.
43:28
I mean everyone loved where the fear being discovered but I
43:30
think discovering what enemy the world looked like.
43:34
Although it is trout and pretend to be Mexican.
43:37
But within that there's a there's.
43:38
A Let me do the accent. I'll do it all right.
43:41
We're not. We're not.
43:42
We can all. We all know the ACT, what it
43:44
sounds like. But I think Faria and her
43:46
relationship and kind of what it is to be in involved in that
43:49
kind of destructive relationship, utterly
43:51
fascinating. But of course, she has to be
43:53
murdered. Yeah, yeah.
43:55
Yeah, we are. That's.
43:56
What we've done, haven't you? We've gone from in this
43:58
conversation, we've gone from the sort of liberal messages of
44:03
acceptance that that the right wingers complain about in the
44:07
modern times to the inadvertent offensiveness of the classic
44:14
series that the left wingers complain about.
44:16
Yeah, so we. We we have gone on a journey.
44:20
We. Have certainly gone on a journey
44:21
and we've actually proved the point.
44:23
What we proved is that Doctor Who has always had a political
44:25
element in it. Or in certain phases it's had a
44:27
political political element, but it doesn't always chime with a
44:32
kind of liberal sensibility which we might want to find.
44:36
Or it's liberal at the time, but it's of it's time.
44:41
And I think that's certainly around Dixon.
44:43
Holmes is right. I'll.
44:45
Certainly say it's annoying the right people now, yes, I think.
44:49
But the difference between the classic series and the news is
44:51
that you alluded to this earlier when you said what was it like
44:54
in fan circles back in the day? Was there was a fanzine coming
44:57
out and there was the occasional Doctor Who meet up and that's
45:01
all you've heard of these arguments, you know, and points
45:04
of view. Once a week, if you're lucky, a
45:06
letter got in. Nowadays we've got a platform
45:09
where everybody is heard, so suddenly there's a million
45:13
voices coming at you and a small percentage, but us very vocal
45:17
percentage are making their point.
45:20
Yes. And I think I think you've also
45:24
got in new who three show runners that we've had now since
45:31
2005 with Davis return obviously who are very politically aware
45:37
politically active and aware of fandom.
45:39
I don't know JNT for huge phases of his run was interested in
45:44
politics. I don't think he saw it as
45:46
Jermaine within the series but I think it's to his credit that he
45:49
gives Cartmel his head and that's him run with the type of
45:54
scripts that he's working with editing allowing through in 25
45:59
and 26. I I think I think there's an
46:00
extraordinary and vibrancy there I I I think you know Ronan
46:06
Monroe comes in there into more subtle script but it's certainly
46:10
it's it's condemning some of the attitudes we see in the Daleks
46:13
around fighting. It's about consumerism.
46:16
It's about the States and and I think, yeah, I think what he
46:21
does Carmel, what he does with with with AC Journey, I mean
46:25
it's easy to laugh at. We, I think we used to wipe his
46:27
firebombed it. But actually as a product of his
46:29
time he's looked at racism. That's his way into this
46:32
character and from that he can look at other elements within
46:37
late 80s society which need to be critiqued and need to be
46:39
pushed back against. And I think we've got that now
46:41
with these showrunners that we've had more overtly at the
46:46
moment, I think. And with Chipnut I again, I
46:48
think it was more. I I think, I think Russell is
46:52
the most overtly. Political.
46:54
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.
46:55
I think, I think Chipmel's probably the least, but it's
46:59
certainly there. I mean, did anyone watch Iraqis
47:01
in the UK, that hotel, that hotel on top of that, you know,
47:04
that toxic waste? Yeah, Like, it wasn't subtle,
47:08
but it made the point. I mean, I think, I think in in
47:11
in season one, where of course it's by no means guaranteed
47:14
there's going to be a Season 2. So there's a sense in which once
47:17
they realise how you make Doctor Who and they throw everything at
47:20
it, and so you get these great iconoclastic moments.
47:22
So the Prime Minister is killed, Downing streets blown up, Big
47:27
Ben is hit by a spaceship, the Doctor was eaten by a time bat,
47:31
the TARDIS collapses. But within that you've got these
47:34
kind of political statements around late phase new label
47:38
early cameronomics if that was even a word.
47:41
I just made that up it really they were never that
47:44
significant. But that idea I mean there was a
47:46
weird thing going on there we it looked like every other week.
47:49
The problem with bankers. So you know in end of the world
47:53
Cassandra got a very weird plan about driving up share price
47:57
which doesn't make much sense. The Sardine want to turn Earth
48:00
into a nuclear pile of fuel. And you think it's happening
48:05
with the long game as well? That conglomerate of bankers
48:09
wants to control the message. Voyager the Dam, Rickson Slade
48:12
and Voyager the Dam. And then the villain in that as
48:14
well. That's just looking to make a
48:15
ton of money out of a load. But of course, Voyager the dam
48:17
is one that the wrong people have looked had to go.
48:20
Russell J Davis using the cliche of the villainous wheelchair
48:23
user in his previous Yeah, and of course, they've looked at
48:26
John Lumic as well. But then Russell is the first
48:29
person to say yes, that was OK then, It's not now.
48:33
Things have changed. We've got to move with it.
48:35
And I know you know, as as an academic, I see exactly what he
48:38
means in terms of this long history of reading physical
48:42
deformity as evil. And it's just wrong.
48:45
And it's Sherlock. Doctor.
48:46
And it is there. It is there.
48:47
Think Magnus Grill Shara's Jack. You know the Borat.
48:51
I mean that that the climax of Time Lash where the doctor
48:55
basically says you're an ugly twat and I'm going to kill you
48:58
now. It's just awful, isn't it?
49:00
It's just it's it's doing the complete opposite of what Doctor
49:04
Who's doing now and. And it is there in Dafros.
49:07
You can't really get Davros. Certainly by the time he comes
49:10
back in the 80s, most people would have seen For Your Eyes
49:14
Only where we can't say it's Blofeld for contractual reasons,
49:18
but it is Blofeld by this point, he's in a wheelchair and he's
49:20
dumped down a cooling tower. And are we meant to applaud that
49:24
or we meant to go, oh, Bond, you shouldn't have done that.
49:26
I think you're meant to applaud it because he's a villain, but
49:29
he is in this type of wheelchair.
49:31
And then Dallas turns up again, and here we are, the kind of
49:34
cliche of the scarred villain in in a wheelchair.
49:37
So I I think absolutely for the right intention.
49:40
It's fascinating that wheelchair users don't like that removal of
49:43
that figure. So OK, it's saying we listen to
49:47
the people that are shouting the loudest.
49:49
What is the conclusion that we draw then?
49:51
What? What action do we take?
49:53
We suddenly bring in a lot of it's terrible, you know, we kill
49:57
off the black people. We make the women trip over, you
50:00
know, run away screaming, you know, we murder all the gays.
50:05
What do they want? I mean, do they want us to go?
50:08
Backwards. What?
50:09
What? What they don't realise, of
50:11
course, is there's a version of what they want in the Daleks.
50:13
I was thinking about this the other day, particularly after
50:16
the the the colourised version that was there on on the
50:19
anniversary. Dallas is an interesting story
50:21
of course, because it's partly about eugenics, isn't it?
50:25
And if you think about who achieves the the role as the
50:27
master race, it's the Thales. They're blonde and they're
50:30
beautiful. They're exactly what the Nazis
50:32
want. And and if you could remove a
50:34
single scene from that text which is where the Daleks say
50:38
they're planning to bomb Skyro to make the environment suitable
50:42
for them as these figures who were never going to perfect
50:45
their mutation, Which of course is a scene that Ian doesn't know
50:49
about. And so it causes problems there
50:52
at the end of episode four I think, where Ian goads the 1000
50:56
to attacking the dynamic city without realizing they need to
50:59
attack the dynasty. If you remove that, what you've
51:01
actually got is what what appears to be there for the rest
51:03
of the story, a frightened group in wheelchairs being attacked by
51:08
the master race. And I think that's what some of
51:11
them think they've been watching for six years, which they
51:13
haven't been. And what they've really been
51:15
confronted with is that this world is a world that doesn't
51:18
have than just white people in it and doesn't just have able
51:22
bodied people in it. What's interesting, of course,
51:23
is all the people complaining from the LGBT community why they
51:29
wouldn't be tea where they don't, They don't like the tea,
51:31
the old, the LGB community and where do they think they are
51:35
given how fandom has for a long period of time had a a a large
51:41
group within it for within the lesbian and gay community, Are
51:46
some of those figures weirdly are now looking at other
51:49
minorities and going, no, you can't be part of Doctor Who.
51:51
This is, this is our thing. It's a strange, strange world.
51:55
And of course. You know what's happening.
51:57
What's happening with the new series now is I remember when
52:01
Grace died at the end of The Woman Who Fell to Earth and, you
52:05
know, I listen to some very progressive podcast where
52:08
they're going. It's appalling, you know, this
52:10
amazing black woman, dare you kill her off?
52:13
I'm like, no, that's the point. And the the consequence of that
52:17
and the emotional effects of that are going to play out
52:20
amongst the whole season. Whether she's black or not is
52:22
irrelevant, I think, in that case.
52:24
I think the problem, of course, is that they've inherited the
52:26
idea that Moffett kills his black characters very easily, So
52:31
Bill and Danny Pink are the obvious examples of.
52:33
That this one made me popular. I do think we can get too
52:37
offended as well. I think it's a fine line between
52:42
not being offended by this stuff and being too offended by this
52:46
stuff. Yeah.
52:47
And you know, like, I remember the, the gay guy died in
52:50
resolution. He had one scene and he says
52:53
something about, oh, these are the best dishes in town.
52:55
I'll tell my boyfriend that all the time.
52:57
And then the next scene, he's either knocked unconscious or
52:59
dead. It's a Dalek so let's assume
53:01
he's dead and people being appalled by that as well and
53:05
saying you know triple suddenly on a, you know anti-gay agenda.
53:08
And then in the next series he has two gay very hot gay men
53:12
snogging in the TARDIS, you know, like it's can be any
53:15
further from the truth. So I do I do think the right
53:20
people can be offended as well unnecessarily.
53:24
It's like it's a bit, it reminds me of when they see you want to
53:27
talk about social media when they were doing Doctor Who
53:30
lockdown and they were doing watch alongs and it was mooted
53:34
that Gareth Roberts, who I think is an appalling man and he is
53:39
absolutely a transphobe. His story Unicorn and the Wharf
53:43
was going to be watched and suddenly everybody was like, how
53:47
dare you show this, like, you know, and here's my big
53:51
objection. Yeah, it's you don't like it.
53:53
Talents of Wayne Chang. Whatever, Unicorn and the Wasp.
53:56
You don't like it because you don't like something about the
53:58
person that was involved with the production.
54:01
That's fine. Don't watch it.
54:04
Don't tell me I can't watch it because I can separate those
54:08
things. And that is something that's
54:10
missing online, is that people just make that assumption that
54:14
because they don't like it, everybody else shouldn't like it
54:18
as well and that's just not the case.
54:20
New corn loss is a is a terrible episode.
54:23
There is. Oh, I love it.
54:24
What are you talking about? That must be That's another
54:28
conversation, isn't it, That That's a hamster.
54:30
Episode. Oh, I haven't done that one yet.
54:32
Oh well, there you go. We'll have to, we'll have to put
54:34
that one in, which seems a nice way of bringing this kind of to
54:38
A to to a conclusion. I think that we're never going
54:41
to solve this issue. But there the idea of dots has
54:43
gone too. Woke ignores the fact that it's
54:46
been woke at various points in its history and also not woke at
54:50
various points in this history, and that's part of the richness
54:52
of the show. And also that, you know, people
54:56
are complaining, the right people are complaining, the
54:59
wrong people are complaining. It's it's always going to
55:04
happen. I think if you dare to risk to
55:07
put a message in something, it's going to be divisive and people
55:11
are going to have their say and they can now, yes.
55:14
Yeah, that's the difference, isn't it?
55:16
It's not just fancy based or at a convention.
55:19
They can tweak it now and they can get stuck in and then they
55:22
can block people and then they're in.
55:25
I mean that that was gonna be my response to you there.
55:27
Should you not want to hear that, there's a very quick
55:29
solution, yes. Would that they all blocked and
55:33
then we could just go back to watching it, or just go back to
55:35
watching the DVDs. Because what what they really
55:37
want of course is Doctor Who to fail to be axed and then they
55:41
can just watch the same 4 episodes from 1967, which is
55:45
their vision of Doctor Who. That's what the DVDs are for,
55:49
and that's now what the universe is for.
55:51
I'm, you know, I'm not entirely unconvinced that cancellation
55:54
anxiety isn't behind all of this, you know?
55:58
But that it's weird of people who now appear to be espousing
56:00
the voice of the right really are looking towards the left.
56:04
And the idea of that we never really want to be in government
56:07
because it's much easier to be in opposition to complain about
56:09
everything and to purge, purge, purge, purge.
56:12
That's what we're in now the purge.
56:14
And actually that's not a Doctor Who is really about.
56:17
I don't think at it's best. At it's best it's about
56:19
challenging injustices. It's about challenging prejudice
56:24
and it's be kind is such an overused term and people who use
56:28
it tend not to be kind, but certainly I think Capaldi's
56:30
dying words in when he doesn't die actually doesn't, you know,
56:33
when he's meant to regenerate. Just be kind and until some
56:37
cruiser is shit, just give generosity to all.
56:40
Which is a wonderful sentiment. I would say though, as well, you
56:44
and I had a conversation off my about the difference between a
56:47
lecture, if something coming at you, and a dialogue.
56:50
And the dialogue is being willing to have your views
56:54
challenged, which means you should be open to hearing what
56:58
the other heart, other side has to say.
57:00
We shouldn't eliminate those voices.
57:03
We they need to be met. Because if once you eliminate
57:05
them, they're justified. But if you can challenge them
57:08
and they're prepared to be challenged, all the better,
57:11
because that's how new ideas emerge, that's how new
57:14
friendships emerge, and that's how a great understanding of
57:17
each other emerge. That's why we're in the state
57:18
we're in, polarization and separation.
57:21
What we want is the spaces to talk about.
57:23
And you're not going to agree with everything.
57:25
And you can see people online that, you know, you might agree
57:27
with most of what they say. And that 10%, yeah, I'm not sure
57:30
about that. But do you block them and walk
57:32
away or do you go, I don't agree with you, you're probably not
57:35
going to change your position, but let's meet here.
57:37
And yeah, I would say. Don't.
57:39
Don't always lock that door. Sometimes just open it up and
57:42
see what somebody's got to say. You might not like it, but you
57:46
know your opinion may change. That may make us sound like
57:49
wishy washy liberals, but that that's, you know.
57:52
Exactly what we are. Worked for a long, long time and
57:55
it's playing to the extremes. The 10% you're never going to
57:58
persuade, you just leave over there.
57:59
The rest would just be here. Things will be much, much
58:01
better. Well, they're going back to the
58:03
conclusion you were trying to make there.
58:05
Yeah, even when you are coming up, people with your opinion,
58:08
even when you are having a dialogue, always become it.
58:12
Capaldi is right. You may not like Moffett, but
58:14
Capaldi is right. And Capaldi, we trust.
58:18
And also never eat avocado pears.
58:20
No, they're terrible. Things Joey's been a pleasure as
58:25
always and I I this is from some some thoughts I I think in the
58:32
we'll get the links there or or where you can listen to a couple
58:35
of my students got some really fascinating things about new who
58:39
in particular and and I hope that the sound quality isn't
58:42
great because it's our first attempt to do it at work but
58:44
we're we're planning more of these type of things so.
58:46
So is this kicking off into a a sort of a a podcast domain, sort
58:50
of a debate arena? Yeah, that's what we're looking
58:53
for. Or Or students talking about
58:55
their engagement with fantasy, sci-fi and fairy tales.
58:59
What was the name of the two students that you had on?
59:02
Eva and Meg. Well, you absolutely have to get
59:04
them on again. Fabulous.
59:07
They are great and they have lots to say and about Merlin and
59:11
about Batman and about DC Comics, and they're they're
59:15
great stuff. And so yeah, we'll keep keep an
59:17
eye out for them and we'll get those the details out once the
59:19
site's actually up and running properly.
59:21
I'll say this, and it may sound a bit disingenuous, There's many
59:24
a Doctor Who podcast that I've pressed play on and turned off
59:26
within 5 minutes. I'll watch that whole hour, all
59:29
right. High praise indeed.
59:33
Indeed. I'm sort of blunt and nice.
59:35
So listen. Listen to your leader and and
59:37
and come to the centre for fairy tales, fantasy and speculative
59:41
fiction. So listen to what some of our
59:43
students and me and hopefully Joe will be on there again.
59:46
I have to and yeah this has been this has been awesome Joe, as
59:50
ever thank you. I.
59:51
Know. Thank you.
59:52
It's been a joy.