The BBC has released some early archive material around the development of its long-running show, Doctor Who, back in the early 60s. Reading some of the early notes, as well as concerns over doing something as dodgy and fringe as “science fiction” on TV is fascinating.
The Doctor without his time-travelling police box is difficult to imagine, but its creators initially proposed he journey through space in an invisible machine covered in light-resistant paint. When BBC producers were devising the show in the early 1960s, they thought viewers should see no machine at all, only “a shape of nothingness”.
The BBC’s head of drama Sydney Newman, who commissioned the first series, insisted an invisible machine would not work and the doctor’s vehicle should be a strong visual symbol. Wisely, writers also said a transparent, plastic bubble would be “lowgrade”. But a seed of the Tardis idea is sown when they suggest using “some common object in the street” like a night-watchman’s shelter.
And then there was the initial description/concept for the Doctor.
In Mr Cecil’s illuminating background notes, he describes the Doctor as follows:
“A frail old man lost in space and time. They give him this name because they don’t know who he is. He seems not to remember where he has come from: he is suspicious and capable of sudden malignance; he seems to have some undefined enemy; he is searching for something as well as fleeing from something. He has a ‘machine’ which enables them to travel together through time, through space and through matter.”
It’s hardly heroic but that description, apart from being frail, fits David Tennant perfectly, says Mr Sangster. He’s quite unforgiving and it’s up to humans to remind him of his moral duty. […] That first description of the Doctor, played initially by an old-looking William Hartnell, still holds true today, says Doctor Who Online editor, Sebastian Brook, and his mystique is one of the show’s guiding principles. “The suspiciousness is something that’s passed on through the years and the undefined enemy is things going wrong with the universe.
“And the mystery as well. It’s not just a question mark, but the character itself – who is he? If that’s ever resolved in the series, then that’s the day it fails.”
Interesting stuff.
Ummm….hmmm.
Actually that description fits Hartnell perfectly, not so much Tennant, but then again I only saw the Catwoman Nurses episode with him, so I may not have a good feel for him. To me Tennant falls into a point between the 5th and 7th Doctors personallity wise. The 7th Doctor was a delightfully machiavellian/long game type Doctor and the 5th was kind of the McGyuver/seat of your pants/manic/reserved doctor.
I have many discs to loan you …