Me And The Hinchcliffe Era

It's a sort of accepted fact in fandom that the Hinchcliffe/Holmes era of Doctor Who (encompassing the first three seasons of Tom Baker's time on the show) is one of the high points of the programme's entire run. It came following the massively popular Pertwee era when the show once more became a teatime adventure series the whole family could enjoy, and cast an eccentric actor in the role, taking him away from the cosy world of Letts and Dicks' mostly-Earth-based stories and the UNIT family into more strange, alien places riffing on the tropes of popular films from the 40s, 50s and 60s; Forbidden Planet, Frankenstein, Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers, The Mummy, and Doctor Jeckyl and Mister Hyde are some of the films which are clear influences on the Hinchcliffe era, each an adaptation of a literary work most of which are also very well known.

I can't deny that the production quality of these stories is superb. Hinchcliffe opted for a darker look than his predecessor whose reign is often quite colourful, bright and exuberant. Seasons 12-14 favour shadows and more muted tones which help make these strange, new worlds seem all the more mysterious. It also suits Tom Baker's performance at the outset of his time as the Time Lord; more serious and thoughtful in the role, wearing an aire of mystery to emphasise how alien this new incarnation is, he's a stark contrast to the authoritarian yet warmly paternal Third Doctor. The story content also took a darker turn, including more body horror and violence, turning away from the Letts era's penchant for morality tales looking at environmental and political issues and more simply aiming to entertain and scare.

All this is good. Without renewal there's stagnation (as a certain redhead from a completely different Sci Fi series once said) and Doctor Who has survived as long as it has by becoming something different every few years whilst intrinsically remaining the same. The Hinchcliffe era clearly spoke to thousands of fans because it has remained highly regarded throughout the decades whilst subsequent (and previous) eras have had regular backlashes and renaissances, and I feel there are a number of factors which contributed to this. By basing so many serials on classic films, the showrunners were tapping into the Boys' Own fashion of the early 20th Century which, likewise, would appeal to boys of a certain age at the time. The show became very much an action adventure series, giving its viewers plenty to fire the imagination, and became more clearly aimed at boys between the ages of 8 and 15. Baker's first few seasons were also regularly repeated throughout the 70s and 80s in the USA and Australasia which would have embedded them into the consciousness of further generations of young, male fans. Added to this, there's no denying that the production quality is uniformly high throughout this period, moreso than in others, resulting in the episodes appearing less dated. The costumes of the regulars tend to be fairly timeless - the Doctor's varying attire never veers too far from the look of Aristide Bruant as made famous by Toulouse Lautrec's posters, but Harry's formal blue suit and duffel coat and Sarah's habit of often wearing outfits from different eras (rarely does she sport the latest fashions from Earth) ensure that the serials can't be easily pinned down to a specific year or decade like the outfits of, say, Jo Grant, Barbara Wright or Tegan Jovanka.

The stories also tended to take place away from present day Earth; of 16 stories (from 'The Ark In Space' to 'The Talons Of Weng-Chiang'), only four take place on contemporary Earth (technically, only three since the first 3/4 of 'The Android Invasion' isn't set on Earth at all and the final episode of 'The Hand Of Fear' is set on Kastria). This again stops the era from looking especially dated as the designers had to come up with sets and costumes which looked futuristic and/or alien, or rely on the sets, props and costumes from the BBC's extensive Period Drama department. This arguably contributes to why the likes of 'Pyramids Of Mars', 'The Masque Of Mandragora' and 'The Talons Of Weng-Chiang' are so highly regarded by fans (the quality of writing and performances notwithstanding). It's very clear that the era fully deserves its reputation. Why, then, don't I share the enthusiasm of so many other Doctor Who fans?

I've thought a lot about this over the last few months (or years; it's always been something of a mystery to me) which is why I'm writing this piece. Clearly, from the above, I can see exactly what the merits of the era are and fully agree with them. Yet it isn't one which I regularly revisit and enjoy. One clear reason is the presence of Sarah Jane Smith, one of my least favourite companions whose popularity has also been something of a mystery to me, the reasons for which have already been discussed in my previous Blog 'Me And Sarah Jane' (See here). Having given the matter a lot of consideration, it occurred to me that my dislike of Sarah possibly reveals another reason why I'm not a huge fan of Hinchcliffe's seasons.

I've always been something of a feminist and when I watch a programme I naturally look for the strong female characters as I've always felt I can identify more easily with them than any others. Growing up I was surrounded by matriarchal family members, always had more female friends than male and never fell in with the machismo that seems to surround the large number of boys at school. All my role models were female, from Sabrina Duncan in Charlie's Angels to Ace in Doctor Who to Joy Merryweather in Drop The Dead Donkey (all, incidentally, regarded as Tomboys or, at the very least, not particularly sexy or girly despite all being incredibly attractive), and the films I enjoy have always featured strong female characters. Looking, then, at Doctor Who I would need a strong female character present in order to fully enjoy the story (that statement is putting the theory at its most extreme - obviously, I can watch most of Doctor Who and enjoy it whether there's a strong female character in it or not, but I'm more inclined to like a story if one is present). For years I had a very low view of the Pertwee era (with the exception of Season 7), and this is likely because I was under the impression it was all macho posturing with the military involvement, and that Jo Grant was the epitome of a 'Screamer'. When I watched the era as part of my ongoing Marathon I was pleasantly surprised to find that Jo screams a lot less than I had assumed and is not only much more resourceful than, for example, Sarah Jane, but also noticeably develops as a character throughout her three years on the show. Sarah Jane Smith, under Philip Hinchcliffe and Robert Holmes, rapidly degenerates from a feminist career-journalist into a foil for the Doctor who spouts occasional feminist jargon whilst constantly getting into trouble, screaming and requiring help. So without a strong female character in the lead cast, I have to look elsewhere. And this is where I hit something of a wall.

Doctor Who in the 20th Century was never really a show you could claim featured a lot of diversity. Like most television in the 60s, 70s and 80s it was slow to feature much beyond White, male actors amongst its guest cast. As time progressed, more female characters would begin to appear that had more prominent roles to play and, likewise, the number of non-White actors began to increase (albeit more slowly). Yet by the Pertwee era, it was rare that there would be a story that would not feature any actresses other than the companion. Even if they were small parts, such as Meg Seeley in 'Spearhead From Space', Miss Rutherford in 'The Ambassadors Of Death' or Amazonia in 'The Curse Of Peladon', they would still be present and often quite strong (for example, the way Meg goes straight for her husband's shotgun and shoots at the Auton invading her house rather than cowering in fear). Throughout the Pertwee era, we would also see an increasing number of women in positions of authority - think of the Earth President in 'Frontier In Space', Queen Thalira of Peladon and Lady Eleanor in 'The Time Warrior', a character far more competent than her husband, Edward. These were small steps but they were frequent and positive.

One notable thing about the Hinchcliffe era is that this progress seems to unravel. It's incredibly rare that there's more than one female guest character and surprisingly common for the only actress in a story to be Elisabeth Sladen! Of the 16 stories, six feature no other women on screen with dialogue other than the companion. Granted, this includes 'The Face Of Evil', but I'm not entirely sure I can count Pamela Salem's voice-only contribution to bits of Parts 3 and 4. And that isn't counting 'The Deadly Assassin' which famously features no women at all! Of the remaining 9 stories, another six feature women in prominent roles. The remaining three feature the memorable Sister Lamont who has next to no dialogue, Tessa (a technician at the Space Defence Station in Devesham who has even less dialogue and negligible screen time) and the Prostitute, the Cleaner, the Ghoul and the Singer (not the title of a Peter Greenaway film, alas) in Victorian London. We do get the occasional major female character in stories such as 'The Brain Of Morbius', 'The Ark In Space', and 'The Robots Of Death', but compared to the Production teams directly before and after, under Hinchcliffe women's roles were distinctly thin on the ground. It's perhaps not surprising, then, that regardless of the quality of the stories, the production and the acting, I would find comparatively little to interest me during this era.

This theory is backed up by the fact that I enjoy Season 14 best of the three which Hinchcliffe oversaw. This is the series which saw the departure of Sarah Jane in a story with an incredibly strong and interesting female antagonist (even if she does change gender in the final episode) and the arrival of Leela, who I regard as possibly the Fourth Doctor's best companion. Leela, through necessity, is the direct opposite of Sarah. She's pro-active, resourceful, doesn't scream (unless being gnawed on by a giant rat) and wonderfully violent. She doesn't whine or complain unless there's absolute reason and is often the one saving the Doctor rather than the one needing to be saved. It helps that her first story has an incredibly intelligent script and a deeply philosophical plot, and those first three stories give her an incredibly three dimensional character which help to round the era off in style. Leela is basically the strong, female character the show had been in need of.

So, whilst I can appreciate why these seasons are so incredibly popular and enjoy several of the stories as much as the next fan, I don't rate them quite as highly as the series under other production teams. I've spent years fending off comments about how my opinion is somehow wrong, that the show under Hinchcliffe and Holmes will never be bettered, and that I'm an anomaly in Doctor Who fandom. I'm not wrong, for me the show had been and would be better, and I've always been fully aware of how anomalous my views can be. But there are reasons, as stated above, and my preference of the Pertwee, Hartnell and McCoy years over the Hinchcliffe era is exactly what makes the series so great - it can and has catered for a wide variety of tastes which include my own and that is certainly something to celebrate.