Why I like the Hartnell Historicals
This last week has been Hartnell History Week, a celebration of the magnificent Historical episodes that characterize the First Doctor era. History is of course not the sole province of the Hartnell era - it is a show about time travel, after all - but the very early show has the bulk of the "pure" historicals, by contrast to later para-historical episodes, which have aliens in them. This is not intended as a dismissal of para-historical episodes, and there are good reasons why they became the norm, but the pure historicals of the early show speak to the beauty and diversity of that first era. There is a deliberate cycling through of the three directions of time travel - forwards into the future (eg the Sensorites, the Dalek Invasion of Earth, the Savages), backwards into the past (eg the Aztecs, the Crusade, the Gunfighters), and sideways into the unknown (eg the Edge of Destruction, Planet of the Giants, the Celestial Toymaker). And the settings mirror the cast - a science teacher, a history teacher, and their creepy weird "unearthly" student.
What makes the Historical episodes so wonderful is that they really do try to be History. In this era, the show is intended at least in part to be educational, and to be a conversation starter within the viewing family. And so what they provide is History - as balanced, accurate, and vibrant as it was possible to make it at the time. And it provides an expert to help us through it as well, in the inestimable person of Barbara Wright (Ace Historian!). And they do the frickin research. So, tvtropes talks about something called Mayincatec, which is basically the distressing ease with which popular media exchanges Mayan, Incan and Aztec culture. And then goes on to cite "the Aztecs" as a notable aversion - everything in the episode is specifically Aztec, not generic meso-american. There's a real effort being made across the Hartnell historicals, and a real attention to detail, and it shows.
For one thing they are, almost without fail, stunningly beautiful. Excursions into history are an excuse first and foremost for our heroes to play dress-up, and do they ever. Future fashions are always hard to predict and often fail spectacularly, but the costumes of the past have the potential for real magnificence, and this is consistently taken full advantage of. The resplendent feathers and headdresses of "the Aztecs" or the exquisite silks of "Marco Polo" (which Ian apparently enjoys so much he wears into the following episode); the full High Medieval splendor of "the Crusade" to the simple elegance of Greek and Roman togas to the Doctor rocking a Monk's habit before it was cool; Hugenot flair and Old West fashion - heck, Dodo enjoys dressing up so much she does it in episodes that aren't even historical! To their credit, they're always very conscientious to change and blend in, in a usually futile attempt to avoid unwanted attention. And on top of that there are the set and wonderfully painted backdrops - no gravel quarries anywhere (except Skaro, naturally). It's spectacle at its best - an expansive hugeness of set-dressing, showing us that the world is wide and wonderful.
Because these early historicals have no aliens or sci-fi incursions to constrain and contain the plot, they often have the most incredible scope and scale to them. They're a slice of life, and life is Big. Where modern parahistoricals will often focus on a single personality in order to tell a very human, personal kind of a story - Vincent Van Gogh, Agatha Christie, Charles Dickens, etc. - the earlier ones focus on an era or a culture. Yes there are people - the high and the lowly, the gritty day to day struggle and intrigues of great pith and moment - in a word, History. This is helped by the fact that at this point neither the Doctor nor the TARDIS is terribly good at doing...things, which means are heroes are usually stuck in whatever situation they find themselves in. By contrast to the later show, where one of the main themes has become just how lightly the Doctor treads upon the world - in it, but not really of it, distant and superior - but here he (and they) are dumped into the thick of it, desperately trying not to get swept along with the tide. And so a lot of these stories cover an incredible expanse of both time and space. In "Marco Polo" they literally cross China in horse-drawn caravan. Hundreds of miles, weeks of time, seven episodes of television - EPIC. Many people have talked elsewhere about how Ian and Barbara are constantly questing towards each other. There's no running about in corridors, but there is lots of walking the world - the road to Rome or to Paris, quite literally walking the walk and talking the talk. It's huge and immersive, even in the shorter (four episode) stories. Our heroes don't just visit History - they live it.
But the historical episodes aren't just spectacle and entertainment, spectacular as they are. They take very seriously the question of what History is and what our responsibilities are towards it, both as viewers and as travelers. And one of those responsibilities is not to uncritically apply modern day values to its interpretation. History is to be viewed from within, and the Hartnell Historicals make this point incredibly well. Looking at History through the lens of the present is referred to in the field as Presentism, and is generally understood as something to be avoided at all costs - it is also unfortunately incredibly tempting and easy to do. It's the lens we come already equipped with after all. "The Aztecs" is frequently taken as one of the greatest episodes in the entire show because not only is it not presentist, it is about presentism. You get these four people with their own cultural ideas and values dropped into an ancient civilization, and trying to deal with that fact. To Ian they are bloody savages, uncivilized and evil - and this is demonstrably not true. To Barbara they are noble and enlightened, and just need her guiding hand to get them past their few cultural stumbling blocks and save them - and this is also demonstrably not true, and discovering it breaks her heart. And the story itself neither praises nor condemns, but merely attempts to portray, as completely and fairly as possible. There is no jingoistic or White Savior agenda being pushed in these stories. In "the Crusade" is is noteworthy that Sal'adin is consistently portrayed as more sympathetic, reasonable, and civilized than Richard (Richard I the Lionheart, mind - cultural icon that he is). In "the Reign of Terror" Barbara takes Ian to the mat over getting too critical of the side that happens to be less friendly towards them: "you jolly well read your history, Ian, before deciding what people deserve!"
The historicals really give Barbara a chance to shine, not that she needs an excuse. She's constantly teaching in them, giving background and context to Susan in particular. It's really nice to see expertise come from people other than the Doctor, and Barbara is an expert and a half. In the later historicals when she's not there to smooth the way, our heroes tend to tread a lot less carefully and get themselves into a lot more trouble. But she gives Susan facts and Ian philosophy, and the Doctor fascinating debates as to the line between observer and participant. She knows her stuff well enough to convincingly impersonate a goddess to the people in the position to know best. And when she takes it into her head to interfere she goes in whole hog. She reminds Vicki how to blend in - Londinium rather than London - and Vicki is able to pick up at least some of this expertise and reapply it later as well. Barbara being a BAMF is always a good (and perhaps inevitable) thing - and in her element she is just phenomenal.
There is an ongoing conversation, absolutely crucial to a show about time travel, about what counts as History and what counts as happenstance, what can be changed and what can't - and when you can, whether or not you should. External interference makes these questions easier - if they're are aliens, obviously you go defeat the aliens and put history back on its "proper" course. But who defines what is proper? And in a pure historical, the question of setting right what once went wrong is a much harder one if you don't have a baseline for "right" and "wrong." In the very first episode they give Cave Men fire - is that a fixed point, a stable time loop, a historical necessity they would have arrived at on their own eventually, or a case of genuine meddling, disrupting the web of time? The question is called immediately and has still not fully been answered. In "the Aztecs" Barbara decides to change things, and is told that it is not only wrong to attempt, but in fact impossible: "you can't rewrite history - not one line!" The attitude they adopt by "the Reign of Terror" is on of "we cannot stem the tide of history - we can only try to keep from getting washed away in the flood." This is what the Doctor truly believes at that point - but is it true? He also directly, if accidentally, gives Nero the idea to burn Rome - and is fascinated by the idea that it is, in fact, his fault; and he quite intentionally gives Odysseus the idea for the Trojan Horse, which the episode makes clear he would not have thought up on his own. The plasticity of history is constantly brought into question, as is the ongoing idea of how to behave responsibly in it. The Doctor is willing to advise Joanna up to a point, but ultimately unwilling to interfere in how events play out. He commits to stopping the Meddling Monk from destroying the Vikings, thereby helping Harold the Saxon defeat William the Norman at Hastings, even though this will result in those same Vikings completely destroying the friendly villagers who have been his allies all episode. But his decision to put the preservation of History above human life by being unwilling to save Ann Chaplet from the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve is what causes his last companion to walk out on him in horror and disgust. On the other hand, choosing the other way in "the Waters of Mars" gets him into even worse trouble. It's an important and difficult question, and these early historicals really highlight just how important and difficult it is.
The Hartnell Historicals are a genre all their own, and a true delight. They take the idea of History very seriously, but without forgetting to have fun, where possible or appropriate. They are stunningly beautiful and have a lot of strong female characters, many of whom I've talked about elsewhere. They have a very different flavor from much of the rest of the show, but are an important place to have come through, in addition to being lovely on their own. Happy Hartnell History Week, one and all!
What makes the Historical episodes so wonderful is that they really do try to be History. In this era, the show is intended at least in part to be educational, and to be a conversation starter within the viewing family. And so what they provide is History - as balanced, accurate, and vibrant as it was possible to make it at the time. And it provides an expert to help us through it as well, in the inestimable person of Barbara Wright (Ace Historian!). And they do the frickin research. So, tvtropes talks about something called Mayincatec, which is basically the distressing ease with which popular media exchanges Mayan, Incan and Aztec culture. And then goes on to cite "the Aztecs" as a notable aversion - everything in the episode is specifically Aztec, not generic meso-american. There's a real effort being made across the Hartnell historicals, and a real attention to detail, and it shows.
For one thing they are, almost without fail, stunningly beautiful. Excursions into history are an excuse first and foremost for our heroes to play dress-up, and do they ever. Future fashions are always hard to predict and often fail spectacularly, but the costumes of the past have the potential for real magnificence, and this is consistently taken full advantage of. The resplendent feathers and headdresses of "the Aztecs" or the exquisite silks of "Marco Polo" (which Ian apparently enjoys so much he wears into the following episode); the full High Medieval splendor of "the Crusade" to the simple elegance of Greek and Roman togas to the Doctor rocking a Monk's habit before it was cool; Hugenot flair and Old West fashion - heck, Dodo enjoys dressing up so much she does it in episodes that aren't even historical! To their credit, they're always very conscientious to change and blend in, in a usually futile attempt to avoid unwanted attention. And on top of that there are the set and wonderfully painted backdrops - no gravel quarries anywhere (except Skaro, naturally). It's spectacle at its best - an expansive hugeness of set-dressing, showing us that the world is wide and wonderful.
Because these early historicals have no aliens or sci-fi incursions to constrain and contain the plot, they often have the most incredible scope and scale to them. They're a slice of life, and life is Big. Where modern parahistoricals will often focus on a single personality in order to tell a very human, personal kind of a story - Vincent Van Gogh, Agatha Christie, Charles Dickens, etc. - the earlier ones focus on an era or a culture. Yes there are people - the high and the lowly, the gritty day to day struggle and intrigues of great pith and moment - in a word, History. This is helped by the fact that at this point neither the Doctor nor the TARDIS is terribly good at doing...things, which means are heroes are usually stuck in whatever situation they find themselves in. By contrast to the later show, where one of the main themes has become just how lightly the Doctor treads upon the world - in it, but not really of it, distant and superior - but here he (and they) are dumped into the thick of it, desperately trying not to get swept along with the tide. And so a lot of these stories cover an incredible expanse of both time and space. In "Marco Polo" they literally cross China in horse-drawn caravan. Hundreds of miles, weeks of time, seven episodes of television - EPIC. Many people have talked elsewhere about how Ian and Barbara are constantly questing towards each other. There's no running about in corridors, but there is lots of walking the world - the road to Rome or to Paris, quite literally walking the walk and talking the talk. It's huge and immersive, even in the shorter (four episode) stories. Our heroes don't just visit History - they live it.
But the historical episodes aren't just spectacle and entertainment, spectacular as they are. They take very seriously the question of what History is and what our responsibilities are towards it, both as viewers and as travelers. And one of those responsibilities is not to uncritically apply modern day values to its interpretation. History is to be viewed from within, and the Hartnell Historicals make this point incredibly well. Looking at History through the lens of the present is referred to in the field as Presentism, and is generally understood as something to be avoided at all costs - it is also unfortunately incredibly tempting and easy to do. It's the lens we come already equipped with after all. "The Aztecs" is frequently taken as one of the greatest episodes in the entire show because not only is it not presentist, it is about presentism. You get these four people with their own cultural ideas and values dropped into an ancient civilization, and trying to deal with that fact. To Ian they are bloody savages, uncivilized and evil - and this is demonstrably not true. To Barbara they are noble and enlightened, and just need her guiding hand to get them past their few cultural stumbling blocks and save them - and this is also demonstrably not true, and discovering it breaks her heart. And the story itself neither praises nor condemns, but merely attempts to portray, as completely and fairly as possible. There is no jingoistic or White Savior agenda being pushed in these stories. In "the Crusade" is is noteworthy that Sal'adin is consistently portrayed as more sympathetic, reasonable, and civilized than Richard (Richard I the Lionheart, mind - cultural icon that he is). In "the Reign of Terror" Barbara takes Ian to the mat over getting too critical of the side that happens to be less friendly towards them: "you jolly well read your history, Ian, before deciding what people deserve!"
The historicals really give Barbara a chance to shine, not that she needs an excuse. She's constantly teaching in them, giving background and context to Susan in particular. It's really nice to see expertise come from people other than the Doctor, and Barbara is an expert and a half. In the later historicals when she's not there to smooth the way, our heroes tend to tread a lot less carefully and get themselves into a lot more trouble. But she gives Susan facts and Ian philosophy, and the Doctor fascinating debates as to the line between observer and participant. She knows her stuff well enough to convincingly impersonate a goddess to the people in the position to know best. And when she takes it into her head to interfere she goes in whole hog. She reminds Vicki how to blend in - Londinium rather than London - and Vicki is able to pick up at least some of this expertise and reapply it later as well. Barbara being a BAMF is always a good (and perhaps inevitable) thing - and in her element she is just phenomenal.
There is an ongoing conversation, absolutely crucial to a show about time travel, about what counts as History and what counts as happenstance, what can be changed and what can't - and when you can, whether or not you should. External interference makes these questions easier - if they're are aliens, obviously you go defeat the aliens and put history back on its "proper" course. But who defines what is proper? And in a pure historical, the question of setting right what once went wrong is a much harder one if you don't have a baseline for "right" and "wrong." In the very first episode they give Cave Men fire - is that a fixed point, a stable time loop, a historical necessity they would have arrived at on their own eventually, or a case of genuine meddling, disrupting the web of time? The question is called immediately and has still not fully been answered. In "the Aztecs" Barbara decides to change things, and is told that it is not only wrong to attempt, but in fact impossible: "you can't rewrite history - not one line!" The attitude they adopt by "the Reign of Terror" is on of "we cannot stem the tide of history - we can only try to keep from getting washed away in the flood." This is what the Doctor truly believes at that point - but is it true? He also directly, if accidentally, gives Nero the idea to burn Rome - and is fascinated by the idea that it is, in fact, his fault; and he quite intentionally gives Odysseus the idea for the Trojan Horse, which the episode makes clear he would not have thought up on his own. The plasticity of history is constantly brought into question, as is the ongoing idea of how to behave responsibly in it. The Doctor is willing to advise Joanna up to a point, but ultimately unwilling to interfere in how events play out. He commits to stopping the Meddling Monk from destroying the Vikings, thereby helping Harold the Saxon defeat William the Norman at Hastings, even though this will result in those same Vikings completely destroying the friendly villagers who have been his allies all episode. But his decision to put the preservation of History above human life by being unwilling to save Ann Chaplet from the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve is what causes his last companion to walk out on him in horror and disgust. On the other hand, choosing the other way in "the Waters of Mars" gets him into even worse trouble. It's an important and difficult question, and these early historicals really highlight just how important and difficult it is.
The Hartnell Historicals are a genre all their own, and a true delight. They take the idea of History very seriously, but without forgetting to have fun, where possible or appropriate. They are stunningly beautiful and have a lot of strong female characters, many of whom I've talked about elsewhere. They have a very different flavor from much of the rest of the show, but are an important place to have come through, in addition to being lovely on their own. Happy Hartnell History Week, one and all!