A LONG time ago, when he still had curly brown hair and wore a scarf, the Doctor met his doom on a gantry and regenerated, so it was appropriate that he should be up on a gantry again when he came to terms with his new identity as a woman. The wind whipped at the Doctor’s new hair, the metal creaked under her new feet, and all over the country, sexists, conservatives, and old Doctor Who fans who don’t like change (which is most of them) shifted awkwardly in their chairs.
The new man in charge of the show, Chris Chibnall, knew many of the old fans would be feeling this way so he had the new Doctor address them directly – on screen, the Doctor was talking to an alien monster but in reality she was speaking to the fans and the monster of misogyny. “We can evolve while still staying true to who we are,” said the Doctor. Jodie Whittaker, the actress who plays her, said something similar when she got the part: be afraid of the Daleks by all means, but don’t be afraid of my gender.
Chibnall is certainly right about the process of evolution in Doctor Who – indeed, the idea of change, or regeneration, is built into the show. Chibnall is also clearly keen to evolve away from some of the mistakes his predecessor Steven Moffat made, particularly the overly complicated plots that turned off a lot of viewers. It meant Sunday’s opening storyline was simple, perhaps even too simple and safe: monster comes to earth, attacks humans, and is defeated by the Doctor. It was a good monster as well: dark, ruthless and with a dirty habit of wearing his victims’ teeth on his face as trophies.
In some ways, Chibnall also seems to want to reboot Doctor Who back to the early days of the 2005 revival under Russell T Davies, with the focus on ordinary people in domestic situations who suddenly find themselves fighting aliens. The formula worked well at the time and Chibnall knows he has to find the right mix of new and familiar to keep the brand going and reverse the falling ratings. So, we have back to basics on the plot and all change with the lead character.
But is Jodie Whittaker any good? I’m on record as agreeing with the Fifth Doctor Peter Davison when he said the casting of a woman means the loss of a role model for boys, and I think that’s particularly true for boys who aren’t interested in the preponderance of male heroes who conform to all the usual violent, dumb stereotypes.
READ MORE Doctor Who review: Perfect Whittaker kept me on the edge of my seat
However, the casting of a woman is a fait accompli now (we cannot travel back in time and change it, or at least not yet) so we should take a lead from the Doctor and try to approach it with an open mind. What’s reassuring is that, in most ways, the character is still the same – the antipathy to violence is still there (“only idiots carry knives” she says at one point). And she still favours eccentric outfits, although Whittaker’s costume, including braces and raincoat, is strangely de-feminising, as if the designers lost confidence and chose to dress her up a bit like a man. Some of what she said as well sounded like sentences written by a man for men but spoken by a woman.
I think most fans may also take some time to be convinced that Whittaker has the right qualities to be the Doctor – in particular, is she eccentric and weird enough? At times you could feel her straining to overcome her conventional appearance, manner and voice to appear eccentric. But for the best actors in the role, and particularly the man with the curly brown hair and the scarf, eccentricity is something that comes naturally. Which means Whittaker has quite a tough test to overcome: being the Doctor is not something you can fake.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel