Tuesday, March 28, 2017

A Contrast of Styles

Having just finished Planet of the Daleks, I thought it would be good to do a quick write up on the great contrast in styles that the nominal twelve-part arc of Frontier in Space and Planet of the Daleks is constructed of.

Personally, I liked both of these stories. I liked Frontier in Space better but I'm chalking that up more to originality, though I would say I have a nominal preference for more serious stories and Frontier in Space would certainly fall under that category. But, I would not denigrate Planet of the Daleks for it's core ideals. Terry Nation was perhaps a bit lazy in his execution, or somehow trying to recapture what was ignited in The Daleks, but his vision of Doctor Who is just as valid as Malcolm Hulke's.

I feel that Frontier in Space and much of Malcolm Hulke's stories in general, saw Doctor Who as a vehicle for discussing important points in all facets. He would write about morally ambiguous issues, he would make the "good guys" overstep their bounds towards totalitarianism or other rights restrictions while the "bad guys" would be given some level of justification for their actions, even if those actions are repugnant. His stories are unquestionably designed to get the viewer to think and to challenge the viewer on their ethics and the status quo in general. I think many would agree with me that these were stories that were pointed much harder at the adults who would be watching with the kids rather than the kids themselves, though there was usually enough to keep those kids engaged.

Planet of the Daleks and much of the work of Terry Nation and writers like him, treated Doctor Who as ten-year old entertainment. The stories were usually strongly delineated with white hat good guys and black hat bad guys: Thals good, Daleks bad, etc. They were also peppered with chases, explosions, minor characters getting killed off and other fare that gets the adrenaline and early testosterone pumping. It's as innocuous of fare as you would expect from 80's action stories like Knight Rider or The A-Team. But that's not bad either.

Though the main focus and the approach can vary, there is nothing wrong with either being dense or light, so long as you tell an entertaining story. Some of Malcolm Hulke's work is derided because it is too dense and talky while Terry Nation is often derided for being repetitive and overly reliant on tropes. But if you are entertained by the story, why is that a problem? I find it interesting that a lot of fans deride Terry Nation, yet no story of his (outside of maybe The Chase) comes anywhere near the derision that is given almost the whole of the late 80's catalogue. The same goes with Malcolm Hulke. If someone finds a story like Frontier in Space boring, it is nothing compared to the derision that something like The Twin Dilemma gets.

In the end, I think you have two contrasting styles and style preference will change over time. Terry Nation knew he was writing for a show that was primarily aimed at a preteen, male audience and wrote stories that would appeal to that demographic. He struck gold with the Daleks and spent the rest of his writing career either living off that or trying to replicate it. But even in those times, he knew to keep the run around and adventuring that appeals to young boys.

Malcolm Hulke on the other hand was more interested in the message and shades of grey. He could give a good adventure with runaround, but he made sure that the ideas he believed in and the distrust of authority would come through. To a ten-year old, that may have come across as less exciting than a Nation story, but it would have appealed more to the adults watching with their kids. As fans grow older, they tend to appreciate the Hulke stories more because they can see the depth that was placed their. It ages better over time than a Nation script, but Nation stories are still fun.

So I say, let's not get bogged down with putting one writer down over another. If you enjoy a story, even if it is rather simple, enjoy it and don't worry that it may not be as intellectually challenging. Likewise, don't give slavish devotion to a story that you find boring just because you know it's trying to challenge you. If it bores you, fine. It bores you and will rank lower on your own list. If not, enjoy it. Doctor Who can operate on many levels and one should not worry about only appreciating only a couple of those levels. Does it entertain you or not? That is the only question worth asking when you sit down to watch a story.

No comments:

Post a Comment