Spiral Mutterings 9: Oh, Borusa! What happened to you?

Remember the intro to Deadly Assassin? "For millennia, the Time Lords of Gallifrey...", yada, yada, yada "the greatest threat they had ever known." Well, in 2003 we won't be swearing in a new President of Gallifrey, but we WILL be celebrating Dr Who's 40th.

How? Will we be going on holiday to episodes we've not had access to before? Will we be attending parties where Uncle Ixzlyr and Aunty Chessene dance drunkenly, before having a huge spat? Possibly.

However, my cynical, post-material eighties, side says no. We will be enjoying the first episode(s) of The New Adventures of Doctor Who, starring Paul McGann (at least in Ep 1), a BBC Production. Simultaneously released a week early elsewhere, British viewers will be amongst the first (i.e second or third) to see the new look to an old favourite. And when the BBC announce that the 26 episode run, that filled the post-News slot on BBC1 Saturday Evening schedules, failed to justify any more series', we will mourn.

But who will have killed Dr Who? The Daleks? The BBC men in suits who will suspend their socks rather than suspend their disbelief? No. Sad to report, the hangman responsible for this noose is...(cue dramatic music)..........FANDOM!

So, why would the fans, who have kept the good Doctor alive these past 13 years, kill off a show they've hankered after for so long? Well, first of all, let me start by saying it wouldn't be deliberate. They would not be setting out to kill off a character that they have been following for nearly 40 years. The way it will happen is this. If the BBC commission a new show for 2003, they will have two aims.

Firstly, they will be wanting to produce a flagship fantasy series that will attract huge audiences who may never have watched Dr Who before, and something that will sell well on Video and DVD worldwide due to its quality.

Secondly, they will want to retain the loyal fan base, as this guarantees a minimum UK audience of about 4 million. However, the two aims are potentially mutually exclusive. If you make a series that is popular with the fans, it will have to conform, and refer to, established continuity. This means in-jokes, sequels, and the following of precedents set in earlier years. This is something that can alienate potential new viewers. It would be like joining Babylon 5, famed for its 5 year story arc, in the middle of season 3, and thinking "What the hell is going on?". By the same token, a Dr Who show that has to explain Time Lords, Gallifrey, UNIT, the Daleks, etc to a new audience will bore the fans, because its all stuff that we know. So a balance would have to be struck.

A good example is the Fox Telemovie of 1996. In the UK, it achieved an audience of 9 million, almost doubling the audience of Survival in 1989. We have to assume that those 4 or so million who tuned in to season 26 were fans, as the show was scheduled against Coronation Street, a show consistently in the top 3 for 30 years! The Movie also garnered good appreciation figures. Now, although it hinted at the Master's rivalry with the Doctor, and mentioned Skaro, it did so without a) confusing the newcomers, and b) constantly referring to the Doctor's previous encounters with his arch-enemy. In the US, it suffered from poor scheduling, and so no series was made. However, fandom was in uproar: the Doctor kissing a companion, the TARDIS containing an Eye of Harmony...it was all wrong!!!

Of course, what fandom forgot was that the nature of Dr Who is that the show is naturally disposed to change, and to new ideas. Remember, the BBC have used Dr Who as testing grounds for many radical technological advances (first show to use CSO, SceneSynch, Quantel, first show to be made exclusively in colour, first show to have a complete story aired online). As for the history, I wonder how today's fans would have reacted at the end of the Tenth Planet, when William Hartnell became Pat Troughton. "Oh, you can't do that! Billy is the Doctor". Until organised fandom (and the fanctions within it) reared its head in the mid-70s, such changes in the show could occur with little negative comment. The media hailed such innovation. Why such animosity to concepts such as the Doctor being half-human? Silver Nemesis hinted at the fact that the Doctor was not "just a Time Lord". And when the Doctor kisses Grace, it is more an expression of joy that he can remember who he is, than any kind of sexual thing (for him, at least).

If a new series does arrive, it should be viewed by fans as being a new era. You can't, in all honesty, look at An Unearthly Child and Survival and say that they are episodes of the same show. OK, the change was a gradual evolution of 26 years, but its now half that time again since Survival aired. I, for one will view the new series as I would have viewed An Unearthly Child in 1963 - as a new show. If I want the Hinchcliffe years, I'll dig out a copy of Ark In Space...if I want the old Master, I'll watch Terror of the Autons. Come on, my fellow fans, if the show comes back, let's give it support. Don't kill the Golden Goose with petty nostalgia....

Written originally in 2002, in the run up to the 40th Anniversary, this piece was still relevant when new Who did take to the air in 2005. However, I think one reason that organised fandom has been more lenient with this revival is down to the writer. Russel T Davies is not only a gifted TV writer, but also a fan. He's one of us. And he's not done too badly - has he?