Back in February Tom Tit started a thread on general myths in Doctor Who. I wanted to pick one element of that thread which I commented on and expand it further. After reading yet another comment last night that the Fifth Doctor was a wet fish, which I personally think is untrue, I thought I'd start this thread for two purposes.

1) Too find out what your perception is of a certain Doctor and see if you've ever got it wrong.

2) To see what others perception of a certain Doctor you like gets your goat up because you feel it is so inadequate.

For me, the Doctor I think I get the biggest misconception over is Jon Perwee. I'm watching through his Era at the moment and previously I've stated that he's too serious. Well, in some ways I still do think that but now I'm watching through I can see in some stories there are always little pockets of humour in most stories, especially with The Brigadier and obviously in The Three Doctors with Troughton. I guess the more extremely serious stories happen later in his run with Planet Of The Daleks and those stories where he does seem to moralise a lot. I guess my misconception was that he was never funny at all, where it can be seen that he could be, though he still lacks the eccentricity of other Doctors.

I've never disliked his Doctor, though, always a joy to watch despite the exile scenario business.

As for others perceptions that always annoy me, I'm gonna repost this from the aforementioned thread:


So there you go. That's my examples of personal misconception and what I think of others percnceptions. What's yours? By the way, I want to take the pre-judging of cast Doctors before they are seen out of this. Really want to stick to Doctors people have maybe never seen or have seen for the first time and got their opinion wrong. Plus what they see from others comments that annoys them.

Don't really think these are misconceptions, 1st Doctor was grumpy, 6th Doctor was unlikelable and the 5th Doctor was a bit wet.

The was how they were written. Not all the time but it's the strongest characteristic of each.

Its a shame I preferred the 6th Doctor/Peri relationship in The Mysterious Planet and Davison was at his strongest at the very end in Caves of Androzani, ironically his best story.

As far as Davison goes, that was a deliberate thing. Tom was too in control so they changed that with him. It's the lack of authority that makes him seem a bit wet, he was obviously strong at times but more often than not he was bullied by his own companions.

i remember having a massive doubt over Matt :/
I remember when the first time i ever saw Matt in that special they did to announce the 11th and i took one look at him and just went "NO" and i think it was because in my eyes David was and always would be the doctor and i just honestly couldn't see who going on without him but i was proven wrong when he was staring down the Atraxi and the second he put on that Bowtie and the Tweed Blazer and uttered those four words i just went "Yes you are the Doctor!"
and now i can safely say i did cry when he regenerated

and i from now on give ever actor a chance as i think matt proved everyone wrong
Last edited by jxbrenna : 27-06-2014 at 11:12

But not all the time, and that's the point I'm making. Like I said about Pertwee, I thought he was serious every single second of his era. he wasn't. And I think the examples I've given about the Fifth Doctor are enough to show you he wasn't wet the majority of the time and I personally found the Sixth Doctor quite likeable in Season 23.

Not all the time but it's their major characteristic.
Davison in particular suffered as a result of the production team wanting him to be different from the previous Doctor. Tom was so in control so they took that away.
Davison had a lot less authority and was made more vunerable.
So you get examples of total failure that makes him seem weak, Earthshock with the death of Adric, Warriors with the death of virtually everyone and Resurection with his confrontation with Davros are total failures.

Yes, I agree with that and there were times when his vulnerability as put there by the production team made him seem that way but I won't have it that he had no authority whatsoever and that he spent most of his era being meek when there are many examples where he did show authority when it was called for, when he had to do the Doctorish things that needed to be done. The wet fish/wimp description suggests that the Fifth Doctor stood up to absolutely no-one and spent his entire time being passive.

Which isn't true. That's the point I'm making. The point of the thread. There's more to each Doctor than their general perception.

I certainly agree about Colin Baker's Doctor - not only is it wrong to say he was always grumpy, but there is also a perception that he was unpopular which is not true.

He was actually very popular when he was in the role. The viewing figures for his first season (season 22) were about the same as for Peter Davison's final season and this was despite a move back to Saturday tea-time which JNT had fought against. His AI ratings were also just as high as Davison's.

Sadly, retrospectively, he seems to have been saddled with the reputation as having been an unlikeable, unpopular and unsuccessful Doctor. Michael Grade aside, I would't say any of those is true.

I don't think that "the Fifth Doctor was a wimp" necessarily implies that he never did anything assertively, and I don't think many people would intend to imply that.

Would it not be fairer to consider the statements in context? i.e. the Fifth Doctor was 'wimpier' than the other Doctors, that the First was grumpier, that the Sixth was more abrasive than other incarnations have been?

In any form, the Doctor is always a voice of authority and intelligence, he's always more in control than any of his human companions. Any statement regarding perceived differences between them have to be considered in comparison to some baseline of 'Doctorness'.

I think the most unfair of the three characterisations is the First Doctor, who really was only grumpy for the first few stories, unless he was provoked. The dominant impression I have from his entire tenure is of a lovable old buffer with a dodgy speech pattern and an irrepressible giggle. And he had some very tender grandfatherish moments, especially with Vicki in The Rescue and The Crusade. Yes, he would assert his dignity and authority, but not that much more than other Doctors.

I'd go along with all of that. His warming to Ian and Barbara during Season 1 is a delight to watch. I actually think The Rescue is probably my favourite Hartnell performance. (The Romans comes close; his funniest, I think.) The sequence at the start where he's all befuddled and they gently deal with him is lovely....and then when he instinctively calls the departed Susan's name....it's a great performance. And there he is at the end, taking on the villain. What a great Doctor.

Also agree with the above comments about Colin. I find his Doctor very endearing in Season 23.

I find it annoying when 10 is seen as all happy go lucky, and light hearted.

That side to him was prominent, but there was so much more. He still had regrets and depression about the time war and loss of the timelords. He was often grumpy towards companions after the loss of rose. He voiced his exsapartion or even anger when he thought things were unfair e.g daleks in manhattan - "they always survive, when I lose everything", or his rant at having to sacrifice his tenth life for wilf.

More importantly He had a dark side which often seemed to be bubbling under the surface (like when he gave warnings of stop or I will stop you type thing) or came out full blown - again the rant about wilf is an example but also waters of mars, the end of the doctors daughter, the end of the family of blood, and those are just the one's off the top of my head.

In fact the more I think about it, the more I think he was quite sad during this incarnation and used jokes and the like to put on a front, and people and situations to keep him distracted from his own thoughts. The fact that he was often shown very sad when he lost a companion and was stuck on his own again seems to support this.

I can agree with some of your post to a degree.

When you talk about contrast in Doctors, there's a little scene in Dimensions In Time, okay, not official, but this sort of proves a point. There's a scene at the start of the second episode where the Fifth Doctor is being gloated at by The Rani and he struggles to call up his other selves. Two seconds later, cue the Third Doctor, who gives her a very strong warning indeed. There and then you can see the contrast in all it's glory.

For me the dominant authority of Pertwee and Tom Baker only adds to the reputation that Davison's Doctor was a wimp. At the end of the day the fact he was a Nice, not so assertive and grumpy a Doctor is the same as Tennant's rather emotionally charged Doctor. It's part of who that Doctor was, I think the fact we had this sort of Doctor between both Baker's was good. There is no way Colin Baker could have taken over directly from Tom Baker and had the same sort of debut, I think there been even more uproar than there already was!



Just reading these last two posts, I was thinking how weird it is we always concentrate on either the positive or negative aspects of each particular Doctor depending on how their portrayal is perceived. Hartnell and Tennant as described in the above examples are perfect examples of this. Nobody thinks too much about Hartnell's lighter side because he's perceived as being grumpy whereas Tennant's popularity revolves around the more jokey side of his portrayal, though we know he could be a blubberbox as well(Though not all the time obviously, thought I'd better mention that!) Plus his looks and costume are obviously a hit with the ladies(and doubtlessly some men) as well.

I was thinking about Tom Baker's Doctor too and was thinking aside from the comedy his Doctor did have some other sides to it that doesn't get discussed too often. I think at times he could be quite rude and arrogant but there are some scenes where he can be really compassionate. I think the scene in The Pirate Planet where he questions the Captain about the point of it all was probably the most Emotionally Doctorish scene of his entire Era.

More times than not he would just have short bursts of anger when he saw things that were unspeakably cruel or unjust but here Baker put in a very different sort of performance which sometimes seems out of sync with the story itself.

Then I was thinking of Troughton and was there any other side to his character that never gets discussed? Probably not, I find there's very few negatives to attach to his Doctor. After his first few stories he seemed to change the character very little in his run and he was never nasty to anyone(aside the enemies he had to fight), a bit like Davison in that regard.

Matt Smith's stories are too complicated...

Really?

Really, really?

How are they?

How boring and 'straightforward' do some people want Doctor Who to be?

Further to this, that Matt Smith is a 'funny' Doctor, or lacks gravitas. Sometimes he's silly, sometimes he's serious, or even 'dark' (an easy term that has no real meaning) - just like all of the Doctors. Yes, including Hartnell. I think Smith does an excellent job when the script calls more serious moods.

Davey Boy: I'm delighted to hear you say you saw some of the humour in the Pertwee stories It's a different type of humour I guess to most Doctors, which tends to be of the wacky variety, with the Doctor as a sort of clown. With the third Doctor it's based more on his interactions with the other characters, particularly with the way he and the Brig prick each other's pomposity. And sometimes Liz or Jo too. The Third Doctor, far from the frivolous excesses of most of the other Doctors, takes himself FAR too seriously, and as a result we often find ourselves laughing at him, rather than with him. That said, he is also delightfully rude, which is a wonderful trait

Yes, I think you're right. I'm just watching The Daemons at the moment and there's that superb scene in the pub where The Doctor is asking for directions to the dig and the regulars just get him riled up and even claim he is wearing a wig and fancy dress! Furthermore he still doesn't get his directions to the dig and then Jo asks very nicely and tell her!

What I will say though is that Season 8 is the best Season in terms of Perwee's Doctor. Here we have a Doctor Who is less arrogant that Season 7 and who has more UNIT Stories hence more interaction with the Brig where the humour normally arises. In his last three Seasons, Pertwee's Doctor did imo become a lot more moralistic and
with less stories involving UNIT and the Series being very preachy, it did limit the humour further.

You had stories like Planet Of The Daleks where he seriously straight laced throughout but the following story, The Green Death, that's where I think Pertwee was at his best. I liked all that disguising stuff, shame they didn't use it more often and played up to Pertwee's talents, would certainly give The Master some competition!

Can't help but think of The Highlanders now that we've mentioned it recently. It's a nice Two-Three link.

Was gonna mention that actually but yes, it could've have been a nice continuity link between those two Doctors had disguised themselves more regularly!