Why must those people spoil everything?

Published by Tom

January 3, 2008

I missed the Christmas Day "Doctor Who" because I was in New York. I am enough of a Whovian for that to hurt, but I was able to catch the repeat. Sadly, that hurt too. Russell T. Davies claims to be a fan, but he has no compunction about littering the show with political points.

The Doctor (as libertarian an anti-authority figure as ever didn’t live) scowled at Davies’ predictably odious capitalist characters, one of whom was a cowardly cad intent on self-preservation and the other of whom was prepared to kill every living creature on Earth to settle a boardroom feud. I have encountered all sorts of no goods in my business life, but I can’t say this is a representative picture.

On the other hand, all Davies’ working class characters (of course) are good honest folk with stout hearts This was sometimes, but I have to say not invariably, the case among those proletarians with whom I grew up. Of course, his black proletarians have even stouter hearts, the particular example in the Christmas show reminding me of Boxer from Animal Farm.

I looked forward to watching the Divine Miss Minogue perform. For the first time in her life, she disappointed me. After showing her devotion to diversity by pity-flirting with an implausibly ugly alien, her character made haste to lay down her life for the Doctor, having fallen in love with him on such short acquaintance as to cast severe doubt on her judgment.

How did the man get such a reputation as a writer from such cardboard portrayals? Might it be because his cardboard portrayals satisfy the requirements of the Leftist Establishment? Might his position as the 15th most powerful man in the UK media be based on a sort of sucking-up? Or is he actually as thick as his thin characterisations and richly-bearded 19th Century politics might suggest?

As the closing titles ran, my wife commented wrily, "Right, peasants, now you know what to think." Precisely.

Davies is the sort of Leftist who rarely fails to mention his comprehensive school when interviewed, giving it its full title so as to avoid any suspicion of having been educated. He wears his working-class background as a badge of honour when, logically, that is just as stupid as a Lord being proud of his Norman ancestry. He is so keen to fit the mould of British Leftism that one wonders if even his constantly-mentioned sexuality is genuine. Perhaps his gay partner is a new kind of beard?

Whatever the truth, the insufferably smug Davies, while he is to be praised for reviving Doctor Who, has gone on almost completely to spoil it with his rancid agitprop. If I could give him his own Tardis, I would. Provided I could rig it to break down on the edge of a black hole.

8 responses to “Why must those people spoil everything?”

Kevyn Bodman

January 3, 2008

I started watching the Christmas Doctor who episode when it was first shown; I was unable to maintain concentration following a surfeit of roast lamb (still pink), Christmas cake, 50% cocoa solids milk chocolate, and champagne.Nanny might not have approved.
Perhaps it would have been better to record the episode.
My response to Dr. Who is less sophisticated than Tom’s : eccentric Doctor, pretty assistant, nasty alien villains,the Doctor triumphs.The End.
My favourite Doctor Who was Patrick Troughton.
My favourite assistant was Sarah Jane Smith, with Tegan a close runner up.
People not infrequently discuss their favourite James Bond actors.
Why do they not do so for the Doctor?
Tom,
Talking about writers,George Macdonald Fraser has died.
Any comments on him or his Flashman stories?
I’m a fan.

LikeLike

Reply
Tom Paine

January 3, 2008

Doctor Who is one of the best sci fi concepts ever. The Tardis, in particular, is the best imagined machine. The Doctor is a character outside systems and bureaucracies – a classic maverick hero; self-reliant and anti-authoritarian. Before Davies destroyed Gallifrey, he was usually in trouble with the authorities on his home world. For most of its history, the show was a low budget schlock production. It’s so frustrating that it now has the budget to fulfil its greatness, but has fallen into the hands of propagandists. I have to watch it, just to enjoy the production values, but it’s hard to ignore the constant political digs.
The death of George Macdonald Fraser caught my eye too. The Flashman books are hilarious, while managing to be genuinely educational (that is to say, leading to knowledge, not pushing a particular point of view). Of course Flashy is a rogue (that’s the point), but he is at least not politically correct! I would rather travel with him than any New Man, New Labourite. The idea of following the life of the bully from Tom Brown’s schooldays was inspired.
Maybe I should focus on discussing books and TV shows here? Facing yet another year of drawing obvious parallels between early 2000’s Britain and 1930’s Germany is not an inspiring prospect.

LikeLike

Reply
jameshigham

January 4, 2008

Can I gather from this, Tom, that you don’t appreciate Davies?

LikeLike

Reply
Wolfie

January 5, 2008

You have my wholehearted agreement. The vulgar as well as ridiculous political slant of the whole new Dr Who seasons penned by Davies are trite, infantile bile. Unfortunately the tendency to hold up such mediocrity as representative of the talent of Britain has become the defining strategy of the BBC these days.

LikeLike

Reply
Roger Thornhill

January 8, 2008

I noticed that tired old inverse snob/self-loather (delete where appropriate) “toff is a rotter” play. It just makes RTD look like a knob-jockey.
This, and the use of Kafrin Tight has lowered his stock at Thornhill Towers.

LikeLike

Reply
Sarah

January 9, 2008

Ya know I was going to appear here and take the opposite point of view, waxing lyrically about how RTD’s portrayal of the average man is wonderful boost to the mass public ego of the working class. Or some other claptrap that sounds really intelligent.
But I can’t. Because the new Dr. Who (especially the last Xmas special) really is crap isn’t it? Personally I’m watching it more for morbid curiosity than any form of enjoyment, as the characters just seem utterly unrealistic and RTD seems insistent on killing off all the old favorites (Darlek’s, Cybermen, The Master) simply to seem clever.

LikeLike

Reply
Matt M

January 18, 2008

I think the Doctor is more of a pragmatic anarchist than libertarian (he doesn’t even know how money works). And the idea that the series is engaging in some sort of class war is undercut by a) Pete Tyler, self-made millionaire, being a hero of season 2 and b) Martha’s family being pretty middle-class.
Max and that other bloke in ‘Voyage of the Damned’ weren’t demonised because they were rich, but because (unlike Pete) they had no respect for the lives of others (lack of compassion is the ultimate sin in the DW universe), nor were the working-class couple particularly noble – the husband died because of his weight and his wife committed suicide because she was so grief stricken (and because her weight made her a hindrance to the others). Ballakaffalatta (who, in order to afford his ticket, also had to be pretty rich) was not only the first character of sacrifice himself but was also shown to be a victim of repressive government legislation.

LikeLike

Reply
Tom Freeman

January 18, 2008

I, a few drinks in, enjoyed the Christmas special. But on reflection, you have a point.
What bothers me more about Davies’s writing was his Jesus trip at the end of the last series – as well as the ‘hitherto unmentioned TARDIS trick to undestroy the world’, which if I recall was also the end of the Ecclestone series.
Cheap and easy. As was making the Master a homophobe (Captain Jack a “girlie” – please). The Master is evil, sure, but he’s classy with it.

LikeLike

Reply