Past Doctor Adventure 75: The Time Travellers, by Simon Guerrier

Okay, this really should have followed on from Crisis straight away - the events even overlap, with the final TARDIS scene of that episode being recapped here. Still, as a sophisticated 21st century viewer (ha!) I can cope with cuts between parallel storylines. Once again it emphasises the importance of context, though, as when I first read this book I had no idea that the tight coupling existed - and, indeed, had no idea how many references to other stories there were.

Let me set the scene. It's late 2006, and I've seen six Hartnell serials: the first three, The Aztecs, and The Dalek Invasion of Earth this year on DVD, plus The Time Meddler some years earlier on terrestrial TV. Oh, seven if you count The Three Doctors on original broadcast. I've read only one Who novel, I think - Atom Bomb Blues, which was pretty good - as well as a number of short stories. Then I get this book from the library, and (not to put too fine a point on it) I'm wowed. Over the next five years it's only bettered three times, and when I finally get around to rating it I give it 9/10.

This was Simon Guerrier's debut novel. He's since become something of a First Doctor Season 3 specialist on audio, and has done other things as well; but how does this inaugural book stand up to a second read, now I'm far more steeped in the program, and can spot the references to other stories that I missed first time around? The impatient among you can skip down to the rating, everyone else has some reviewey stuff to work through first...

Spoilers in this review will be minor in terms of plot, but significant in terms of ideas. And, since this is a book in which the ideas are an important part of the enjoyment, I strongly recommend reading the book first. Go on, this will still be here on the Internet when you get back - assuming civilisation hasn't collapsed in the meantime.

The Moving Finger Writes
Let's start with the prologue and epilogue. Both feature Ian's first meeting with Joan Wright, Barbara's mother, and in both he is nervous and she is wary. Beyond that, it's the contrast that's important. The first (dated 16 September 1967) sets up the tone of the book, getting us to wonder what has happened in London. It paints a bleak picture, describing a period of hardship - but at the same time it celebrates the resilience and humanity of ordinary people. We learn later that this is the aftermath of another Hartnell story, one we haven't got to yet, but a version of that story in which the Doctor wasn't there to save the day. The epilogue - dated 26 June 1965 - also follows on from another story, The Chase, this time an immediate consequence of the TARDIS team's actions in Planet of Decision. The tone here is one of relief, of looking to the future; and it nicely rounds out the book, pinning down the happy ending despite some truly awful things that have happened along the way.

You'll notice that I said both of these were Ian's first meeting with Joan. That's possible because this is a wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey story, albeit with a 60s spin and published a couple of years before that particular marmite phrase entered fandom's collective consciousness. There's two other phrases that are relevant, from almost five decades apart. Quotes, in fact, from the Doctor:

"You Can't Rewrite History! Not One Line!" (The Aztecs)

and

"Rule #1: The Doctor lies." (Let's Kill Hitler, among others)

You can guess where this is going. Most of the series has ignored that first statement anyway, but Guerrier actively retcons it instead by making use of the second. In the process of explaining why the Doctor lied, he sets out his stall selling his vision of the underpinnings of the series. In brief:

1. The travellers can change history. In fact, they do so every time they step outside the TARDIS, and this is the crime of which the Doctor and Susan are guilty: they should have watched the universe from within the Ship, using the scanner, and not got involved.
2. Changing the past effectively creates a new timeline. There is no paradox, but the travellers can no longer get back to the future from which they came - which is now (to appropriate a Pratchettism) in the wrong trouserleg of time.
3. Too ostentatious an involvement in history is likely to be noticed by the Doctor's people, and bring down their wrath; and this is his main reason for avoiding big changes.

All this the Doctor had considered too complex for Barbara in the temple of Yetaxa - and unnecessary, too. Hence the convenient untruth of his statement. And yet, in this novel, he comes across a situation that he has no choice but to fix, regardless of the consequences. This is the beauty of the book: it gives us Big Ideas, but it also gives us an in-story reason for those ideas being explored. The Doctor would have been happy to leave Barbara believing the lie, but circumstance dictated otherwise; and we get to witness the discussion.

It's a great theory. Most of the show's history works seamlessly with it, and it can be used to explain some of the inconsistencies between stories, like a gentler, less indiscriminate version of the Last Great Time War. It makes sense of TARDISes. Why do they need so much space inside? Because the observers live there the whole time they are away from home base. And it's why they need scanners, and chameleon circuits, and food machines.

There's more: that third point, about the Doctor's avoidance of his people, ties in with the final serial of the 1960s; but it has more immediate consequences too. However, do you remember when I said the impatient could skip down to the rating? Like the Doctor, I lied, because I'm splitting this review. It deserves to be given the space it needs. Consider this a cliffhanger of sorts.

Next Time:
More about The Time Travellers...