Ruminations, Peregrinations, and Regenerations: A Critical Approach to Doctor Who (review)

In the introduction to this latest collection of essays on Doctor Who, Chris Hansen admits that he is ‘a fan’ and ponders whether there is ‘something improper about a fascination with a pop culture artefact’ (1). Over its almost fifty years of existence, the Doctor Who phenomenon has been one of the most influential forces in blurring the distinction between fans and academic critics, and Hansen quickly reassures himself that enough academics have produced interesting work on popular culture that he does not need to pursue the matter further. However, he then goes on to make the rather more surprising claim that Doctor Who is ‘one piece of popular culture that hasn’t been examined all that much yet’ (1). Given the sheer amount of writing on the original series (1963–89) and the recent upsurge of publications inspired by the return of the Doctor to television screens in 2005, this observation seems like a rather specious justification for the present collection. Admittedly, some of this work is contained in fan publications (but often with a fairly sophisticated critical approach) and some of the recent publications were probably still in press when Hansen wrote his introduction; but, since the new series began, critical studies of the series, anthologies, articles and fan publications have poured forth from the presses. In fact, Doctor Who must be one of the most intensely examined of popular texts. Of the more recent publications, I would single out David Butler’s equally awkwardly titled anthology, Time and Relative Dissertations in Space: Critical Perspectives on Doctor Who (2007), and two single-authored studies, James Chapman’s Inside the TARDIS: The Worlds of Doctor Who (2006) and Matt Hills’s Triumph of a Time Lord: Regenerating Doctor Who in the Twenty-first Century (2010).

Of course, none of the above necessarily means that another contribution to the critical debates is not welcome. This particular volume includes a number of new voices from the UK and the US, along with a few more seasoned commentators. Its title is a more accurate indicator of its structure than its subtitle. The 20 essays offer nothing like a single ‘critical approach’ (probably all to the good) but rather a wide variety of approaches to different topics, loosely organised into seven sections under the headings: ‘Who is the Doctor: Constructing an Identity’, ‘Changing (or not Changing) History’, ‘National and International Identity’, ‘Companions: Gender and Race’, ‘Intertextuality and Metatextuality’, ‘Audience Studies’ and (rather lamely) ‘Other Considerations’. Unfortunately, this arrangement leads to a certain amount of repetition, as many contributors feel the need to provide background on the history of the series, and, since most of the authors do not draw on the full range of earlier writing on the series, there is also a good deal of rehashing of old arguments.

The editor seems to have left it to the contributors to edit their own essays (English and American spellings indicate the origins of the authors, and some chapters are poorly proofread). This editorial laissez-faire attitude even results in some uncertainty about the starting date of the new series produced by Russell T. Davies: most essays follow the usual practice of giving the date as 2005, when the first episode aired, but two assign it to 2004 and one even to 2003, presumably referring (without explanation) to different stages in the planning process. However, the editor was presumably responsible for the decision to include a bibliography (organised by chapter) and the notes in two separate sections at the end of the volume, rather than at the end of each chapter, making the process of reading the book carefully rather awkward.

The essays are clearly directed at fans, and most of them would mean very little to readers whose engagement with the series is less intense. As an academic and a fan myself, I enjoy reading almost anything on Doctor Who, but too many of these essays come across as rather laboured...