Doctor Whosday: Politics, Metaphor, and Unearthly Children

The beginning of the first political debate.

In 1963, one day after the assassination of President Kennedy, the BBC launched a new sci-fi show in its Saturday Afternoon slot that would forever change science fiction as we know it, and lead to hordes of screaming fangirls shouting things like "Allons-y!" and "Wibbly Wobbly, Timey Wimey!" and pretending that fezzes are somehow cool.

Not that there are not screaming fanboys as well. Not that I would know anything about that (did you hear the latest rumors for Series 8 OHMIGAAAAAAWD!)

This terrifies British people. One wonders how they
ever beat the Nazis.

Yet for those who know your Whostory (a portmanteau of "Doctor Who" and "History", in case you were wondering), you know that while the first episode was considered to be very well done, the rest of the first serial was seen as lackluster, and the show did not become a smash hit until the second serial and the introduction of everyone's favorite plunger-wielding pepper pots, the Daleks.

But there are no Daleks in the first serial, which is generally called "An Unearthly Child", though there are other names. See, the early serials had individually titled episodes, so even though there were official stories with beginnings and ends, they had no official names. Which is why some people call this story "The Tribe of Gum", which sounds silly, or "100,000 BC", which sounds more like a movie starring Raquel Welch.

Yes, I know that Raquel Welch was in "One Million Years BC", but that is just not accurate according to modern evolutionary theory. 100,000 BC is more like it.

So the very first Doctor Who serial begins in the far distant past. Thrill to the spectacle! The odd fashions! The archaic social traditions! The primitive technology!

Yeah, the sixties were a weird time.

Carole Ann Ford played Susan. Who was 16.
Congratulations, now you're a terrible person.

The first episode of Doctor Who, "An Unearthly Child", is definitely a product of its time. It begins with two schoolteachers, Barbara Wright (History) and Ian Chesterton (Science and general Awesomeness) discussing their concerns over a young student of theirs, Susan. Fearing that she has some trouble at home, the two teachers decide to follow her back to where she lives, to meet the mysterious "Grandfather" she keeps talking about.

Yes, that's right, in the sixties schoolteachers would get together for more than five minutes out of concern for a student! Nowadays that sort of empathy would be detected, and crushed beneath pay cuts and workloads.

But this was a simpler time. A time when a mysterious old man living in a police box in a junkyard and possessing no identification whatsoever could get his granddaughter enrolled into a fine school with no questions asked. Even Ian and Barbara admit that they are motivated as much by curiosity over the mysterious grandfather than any concrete reason to be concerned for young Susan's well-being.

Their mild curiosity and desire to stalk a sixteen-year-old girl turns into alarm, however, when they enter her junkyard and find that she has completely vanished. Worse yet, there is a rather creepy and extremely suspicious old man lurking in the junkyard as well. The old man, who is in fact Susan's grandfather and The Doctor, evades all of their questions, and seems most keen to get Ian and Barbara to leave. Which they almost do, until they hear Susan's voice coming from inside a police box.

Who wouldn't trust this face?

Forcing their way through the unlocked door, they discover the TARDIS. If you've seen Doctor Who, you know the routine. If you have not, the TARDIS is larger on the inside than on the outside, and this never fails to baffle and bewilder anyone who steps into it. Ian splutters a bit about having walked all around the police box, and about it being bigger on the inside, and about starting the trend which nearly every companion ever will follow henceforth.

The Doctor, quite reasonably, says that since they have now been discovered, they will have to take their fantastic ship to another time and location. Even if Ian and Barbara promise to tell no one, the Doctor does not trust that they will keep their word.

When Susan insists that she will stay in the 60s, and the Doctor is faced with losing his granddaughter, he decides to kidnap both Susan and her teachers, taking them into the distant past. No, not the forties. More distant. Caveman times distant.

The first episode of Doctor Who should really be considered a stand-alone story, an introduction of sorts. It sets up the personalities very well. The Doctor is wise, but intensely arrogant. He sees those who do not understand him as not worth his time, and he assumes anyone who disagrees with him is simply ignorant. Ian, on the other hand, is a rationalist and a skeptic. He tends to accept what he knows, and he demands proof of any extraordinary claims, but once presented with that proof he accepts the unknown. Barbara is the empathetic one, the one who has the most humanity and love of other beings. She will be the glue that keep the battling Doctor and Ian together. And Susan mostly exists to cause trouble, because back in the olden days TV shows used to think that a character that only exists to screw up was a good thing.

Hell yes he will.

I think we could use more characters like Ian. Intellectuals on television usually fall into one of two categories: The "true believer" whose advanced knowledge causes them to accept all sorts of fringe theories (which, television being what it is, normally turn out to be true), and the "mindless skeptic" who refuses to believe in anything even when it is right under their nose.

Ian, on the other hand, is a true skeptic. He demands evidence, and demands a rational explanation, but once that evidence and that explanation are provided he will accept it. He is a very clever man, but he is not all-knowing, and over the course of the show he will learn many things. That quality of being a skeptical, intelligent character who nonetheless does constantly learn new things is a rarity in television.

The impulsive nature of the Doctor's kidnapping apparently caused some damage to the TARDIS, including making it impossible for them to know exactly when and where they are, or to properly guide the TARDIS on its adventures. This randomness and inability to control the TARDIS would be the driving force of the show until 1970. In addition, the trip damages the TARDIS's chameleon circuit, which means the ship is stuck in the iconic form of a police box from here on.

From this excellent setup - The kidnapped teachers, the mysterious old man who claims to be from another time and civilization who cannot be trusted, and his naive and trouble-prone granddaughter - most people consider the serial to go downhill. On the surface this is true. The group get captured by cavemen, there's a squabble over who will be leader of the caveman tribe, the cavemen want the group to show them how to make fire, the group escape, are captured again, make fire for the tribe, and finally escape again with the whole tribe after them.

In the end, the cavemen seem no more enlightened or improved by their experience, so all the running around and squabbling over who makes fire seems to be rather pointless. Not to mention all the talk of savage peoples with savage minds that cannot understand civilized concepts like friendship and cooperation smacks of racism, and the arguments made that the cultures of "lesser" races were inherently inferior to western culture.

But I would suggest that the story is not about civilization and savagery at all. Instead, I think the story rather brilliantly captures the insanity of politics, and the difference between reasonable politics, and unreasonable politics.

Within the Tribe of Gum (which is never mentioned on screen, thankfully, the terrible name is only found in the scripts and production notes), there are two people in conflict. Za is the son of the old leader, who was leader because he could make fire. But he never taught Za that secret. Since making fire is the sign of leadership, this makes Za seem like he is not the true leader. Then there is Kal, the outsider. Kal's tribe perished, but Kal was taken in by the Tribe of Gum and nursed back to health. He believes that he can make fire, and that he is a stronger leader than Za. Then there is Horg, who seems to represent the will of the tribe, and who keeps waffling between supporting Za and supporting Kal, although his daughter, Hur, loves Za and wants him to be leader.

Got all that? Good. Because here is what is really going on: The whole serial is about the grand farce of politics.

Actual fake alternate dialogue cut from the script.

Fire is the hotbutton issue. Who can make fire? Without fire the tribe will have a difficult time in the winter. Because of this, fire grows to religious importance. Whomever can make fire is the leader, and the battle between Za and Kal is between which one of them can make fire.

Fire could be any hotbutton political issue today. It could be national security, the economy, gay marriage, whatever. Any issue that two politicians will fight over. The first politician claims that they will strengthen the economy, and that their opponent is weak and will weaken it. The second politician claims the first politician lies, and that THEY will strengthen the economy, while the first politician is the truly weak one.

The first debate between Za and Kal plays out in this manner. Za will make fire, because he has been practicing making fire the way he has seen his father do it, and he is certain he will make fire soon. Kal has captured the Doctor, and he saw the Doctor make fire with matches, so he believes the Doctor can make fire from his fingers, and give that knowledge to Kal. Each claims the other is lying, and neither of them can actually make fire.

What is that, if not a metaphor for politics?

This is a metaphor for the lobbying process.

Horg waffles back and forth, swayed first by one argument, then another, just like the voting public careening between two political stances based on the propaganda. And the arguments are all propaganda.

When a woman of the tribe is killed, Kal accuses Za of killing her so he could let the Doctor's party, and thus their chance at fire, escape. He claims that he saw it with his own eyes, and the woman is dead, so she cannot speak. At this point all the viewers realize how flimsy the evidence is (especially since the viewers know it was Kal, not Za, who killed the old woman), but the tribesmen do not realize it. They are swayed by propaganda and rhetoric, even though it has no substance. It takes the Doctor to demand evidence, pointing out that Za's knife is clean, while Kal's is stained with the woman's blood.

At this point Kal behaves like a typical politician, owns up to killing her, and claims he did it because she had betrayed the tribe and set the Doctor and company free (which was true). He would have gotten away with it too, except the Doctor adopts the tactics of propaganda, and whips the cavemen into a frenzy by claiming that Kal will kill all of them in their sleep, even though Kal would clearly do no such thing.

In the end, Kal is driven out not because Za has fire, but because Za and the Doctor make the people hate Kal as a murderous outsider and traitor, reminding me of nothing so much as the communist witch-hunts of the period.

The tribe only understand things in terms of immediate gains. When Kal cannot produce fire instantly, Za gains ground. When Za cannot produce fire instantly, Kal gains ground. Like politicians, they squabble over the next term with no thought toward the long view. The Doctor's party, being rational and reasonable, seek to teach Za how to be a good politician, to care for the tribe. Ian eventually makes him fire in exchange for their freedom. Yet Za turns right around and imprisons the group. Why? Because he has what he wanted, so why should he keep his campaign promises?

In the end, the cavemen chase the Doctor's party all the way back to the TARDIS, and we learn a valuable lesson. Regimes change, but politics remain the same. Za is no less savage than Kal. He is merely the politician who won. The Doctor and his party, being the ones who tried to reform politics and make it a more reasonable, effective process, are shunned and hunted by those too invested in the current political system to stomach reform.

Or maybe it's just a racist lesson on how savage different cultures are. It was the sixties. It could be both.

Star Trek V ruined campfire scenes forever.