“Inhuman sons of men” (H. G. Wells's The Time Machine)

PREVIOUS POST                                                                                                            NEXT POST

H. G. Wells's The Time Machine is a story about a man only known by a title (the Time Traveller) whose first known trip, to the future, sees him exploring an alien world populated by two descendants of the humanoids of old. The members of one of them have forgotten their science and culture, but are handsome and fair and peaceful; the others have not forgotten how to work their devious machines, or about the practicalities of life; they lurk out of sight, twisted and alien, yet retaining a spark of genius which the Time Traveller cannot help but admire. 

It's still stupid of Nation not to have
noticed, but the Thals don't look like
that because they're Aryans, they look
like that because they're Eloi.
(Note: the beings pictured above
are in fact Eloi, not Thals.)

In other words, it is a shockingly similar predecessor to The Dead Planet. That shouldn't be surprising; The Time Machine is what put time-travel on the map to begin with, and would doubtless have been consulted over and over again as early Doctor Who tried to find its footing. (How long did it remain a guiding influence, I wonder? Towards the second half of the book, the Time Traveller is confronted with some giant crabs…) As we will see in a few months, in many ways, 1965's Dr Who and the Daleks feature film is very much a redressing of the 1960 Time Machine film adaptation, whose financial success AARUU no doubt wished to replicate. In fact, it may well be that it is to the success of said 1960 film that a BBC TV drama about a group of time travellers owes it sheer existence.

The Thals are more mature, and much wiser (despite their forgetfulness of their history), than the Eloi. And the Daleks are stunted little toad-people, rather than the sickening-looking, yet muscular ape-men the Morlocks. But the Eloi/Morlock and Thal/Dalek pairings are still undeniably similar; the sheer name of "Dalek", if it does not come from the "Dal-Ek" volume of an encyclopedia as Nation liked to pretend, is very probably a redressing of the similar "Morlock". Like the Eloi, the Thals are off-putting to the time traveller(s) because of their naiveté, but the time-travellers still feel a kinship with them that is absent in the deathly Daleks/Morlocks, whose thought processes have become as alien as their mutated appearance. Here's the protagonist of The Time Machine about the Morlocks:

The sudden realization of my ignorance of their ways of thinking and possible actions came home to me very vividly in the darkness. 

If that doesn't describe the feelings that the Daleks in The Dead Planet are meant to evoke, then I don't know what does.

The concept in The Dead Planet that over time the roles have reversed — the Thals were once the warlike scientists oppressing the peaceful Dals, but now they are pacifists and the Dals' sons the Daleks have turned their fevered minds to genocide — even mirrors the satirical reversal of capitalist society in The Time Machine, where the Morlocks, descendants of an increasingly isolated working class, have become the ones preying (quite literally) on the decadent descendants of the class which was once made up of its oppressors. I'm not sure this is intentional, but it's interesting.

So those are the obvious points of similarities out of the way. Now here's the real question: how can The Dead Planet possibly be a thinly-veiled variation on The Time Machines if you take into account that The Dead Planet is The Survivors with its ending surgically removed? To recap for the more forgetful of my readers, The Survivors hinged on the revelation that there were three alien races in all, not two, and also that the Daleks and Thals weren't as different from each other as both peoples had come to believe. The Daleks in The Survivors weren't Morlocks, they were human players in a morality play about letting go of old prejudices. So?

Well, it's a hard question. I have become aware of it, but I don't really have a witty answer to it. Perhaps it is simply that Nation originally wanted to do a clever deconstruction of The Time Machine, which, like any "critical rewrite", started out with the familiar structure and then strayed from it more and more, cracking the seams — meaning that when the latter half of the plot, the one containing all the clever satire, had to be excised for contingent reasons, all that was left was the first half of the parody; a joke without a punchline. 

Except that while a joke without its punchline ceases to be recognizable as a joke, that doesn't make it a functional story. The leadup of a joke sets up a tension which must be resolved in some way. The Dead Planet echoes The Time Machine in all kinds of ways, and borrows much of its concepts and imagery, yet somehow, it all comes across in The Dead Planet in a way that somehow leaves one thinking there is more to this story, some fundamental element that hasn't congealed quite yet. No one leaves The Time Machine wondering what the Morlocks will be up to next; the Eloi/Morlock conflict was simply a fact of the book's universe, a horrifying but inevitable status quo. It will end someday, but only because the Eloi and Morlocks themselves will end, and, with them, humanity itself. 

The Dead Planet, on the other hand, inherits The Survivors' yearning for some sort of closure to the Daleks' story. A closure that can never come. Why? Because with its original ending lost, The Dead Planet's Thal storyline was reduced to what is frankly a mind-numblingly dull remake of the Eloi. The real reason that returning to Skaro to tie off the Daleks' storyline is quite impossible is that no one wants to hear from the Thals again, and yet The Survivors is not a story you can do simply do without the Thals. The Time Machine-esque Dalek/Thal storyline has to be in place if it is to be toyed with and rejected.

No but seriously,
the Thals are so dull.

And now we know why the Thals are so conceptually dull, why they are unconvicning Eloi-ripoffs with all the grating visual aryan-ness, and none of the satirical substance. They were conceived as simply the lead-up to pulling the rug underneath the audience's feet and revealing that no, "Eloi vs Morlocks" isn't actually how it works.

Now we know why the other shoe about the Neutron War will never drop — and why we leave The Dead Planet with this inexplicable, deep-seated urge to keep watching the Daleks to see what happens next. 

Next week, enough faffing about: we jump into The Dead Planet itself. I formulated the bulk of the questions we'll be considering last post, but the short version is this: how do you make a (halfway)functional story out of a joke with its punchline cut off? If the Daleks cannot be redeemed, if they cannot be revealed as false Morlocks who can be turned back into human beings, then what must they be? 

“The enormity of their crime” (The Survivors)

PREVIOUS POST                                                                                                            NEXT POST

It may seem oddly unorthodox to begin the story of the Daleks not at the beginning, but before the beginning; with a story that no one (least of all me) has ever seen, or even read, because it only existed for a brief period of time in the mind of a writer by the name of Terry Nation, sitting in his office in 1963 by a typewriter. 

But the Daleks at their beginnings are defined almost entirely by their backstory, by their past — the great Neutron War between their forefathers and the Thals', the one which turned Skaro into the irradiated hell visited by the Doctor, Susan, Ian and Barbara, the one which reduced them to paranoid little mutants hiding in gliding metal suits. The Daleks of The Dead Planet are defined as much by the Neutron War as their descendants in Dalek onwards will be by the Last Great Time War — complete with the shadowy Thals and Time Lords respectively, whose importance is first communicated to the viewer in terms of “this is the species which fought a war with the Daleks and reduced them to this”. 

So it makes metaesthetic sense to start this review of Dalek history before their first screen appearance, as well. 

Because that's what The Survivors is, to those of you who didn't know: the story that never was. The first draft of what would later become The Dead Planet, altered drastically before it made it to screen. 

So what would have been like? Visually, much like the Dead Planet we got, I should imagine. Despite my fanciful idea, as illustrated above, of The Survivors starring Cusick's first Dalek sketches rather than the familiar pepperpots, it's even likely the final Dalek models would have looked basically the same as they do in The Dead Planet. 

And story-wise too, in some respect. Most of the serial would have been the same, though there is a variety of plot details cut at various stages of development of The Dead Planet (the eagerly-awaited “Great Rain” which would help radiation levels drop, for example) which one might want to reincorporate into a fantasized version of The Survivors. 

No, the meat of The Survivors — of the sense in which The Survivors is a completely different story from The Dead Planet — is instead to be found in the summary given of this road not taken in the legendary First Doctor Handbook:

Terry Nation's original storyline, entitled The Survivors, (…) involved the Daleks joining forces with the Thals in order to repel an anticipated attack by a force of alien invaders whose rockets had been detected approaching Skaro; when the aliens landed, however, the Doctor realised that they were in truth peaceful beings: these people come from the planet that two thousand years before fired neutron bombs on Skaro. 

Since that time, their own civilisation has progressed and they have realised the enormity of the crime committed by their forefathers. They have waited until the radiation level has fallen, and now they come to make reparations and assist in rebuilding the planet. With Skaro's safe future assured, Dr. Who and the others leave for new times and distance. 

And here we see why the Daleks and Thals — why The Dead Planet as a whole — makes so much of their two species' past, of this mysterious, shadowy Neutron War. The answer is the same as in any mystery where certain well-trodden details are hammered on, again and again, the better to surprise the reader when it turns out that not all is as it seems. Just like, forty years later, we will discover that the worst side of the Time War wasn't the one we thought, we see here that the Daleks were never the true enemy. 

[Source]

Except the reveal is that there isn't a true enemy — there was once, perhaps, but that's all over now, so many centuries later; all that remains is the practicalities of dealing with the consequences of conflicts past, and for all to be friends once more. Dals vs Thals, hideous trolls vs handsome aryans, oppressors and oppressed, it was all a false dichotomy, all along. The Daleks and Thals need fight no longer. The Neutron War is history, and Skaro moves on at last. 

It's an optimistic ending, one to warm the heart of any pacifist. The Dead Planet as we know it goes to great lengths to point out how little the modern Thals and Daleks are like the Thals and Dals of old (the original Thals were warriors and the Dals their slaves; oh, how the tables have turned). We'll see next week what this says in the bleaker context of the transmitted version, but within The Survivors, the use of this plot-point is clear: it foreshadows that the whole Dalek-Thal conflict is a thing of the past, born of circumstances utterly unlike those of the present day, which has no reason in the world to start up again generations down the line.

Of course, that ending is also an egregious deus ex machina; the aliens come out of nowhere, dump the mystery's answer at you without the TARDIS travellers doing anything at all to earn it, and then these aliens moralise at everyone and promise to solve everyone's problems. But the thing is, I wouldn't pursue that line of argument too long, because, well… “a group of aliens drops in at a random time, moralises a bit, and solves everyone's problem as well as figuring out mysteries that had lingered for generations” is in fact the plot structure that Doctor Who eventually settled on as its most basic story. It's just that in the future, the aliens are the Doctor and his companions.

Why, then, did they not go with this ending? Budget constraints, apparently. It was bad enough that they were reduced to using ordinary off-the-shelf plungers for the Daleks' manipulator arms — the BBC simply couldn't sprain for a third alien race. That's a bit like if execs ordered that The Doctor's Daughter end with the Source actually being a bomb which kills all the villainous Hath, because, well, they just couldn't afford the “glowing life-giving gas” effect the original concept called for. 

And so for lack of a couple of costumes, the Daleks lost their true ending. 

The Daleks die looking up.
I wonder why… Where they
expecting someone to descend
from the heavens? 

They still end in The Dead Planet, mind you. They die. But reluctantly. As the last Dalek begins to curl up and die, it still cries: “the • Daleks • must • survive!”. Even as the TV story famously throws a gigantic spanner in the works of bringing back the Daleks later by killing all of them off, it makes their return inevitable by denying the Daleks the closure they were originally designed to acquire. In the rounded narrative of The Survivors, the past, the very past that has defined the Daleks from the start, comes back to put a definitive end to their story, ending the Daleks not physically but conceptually. In The Dead Planet, the Daleks simply die, against their wills. 

Elizabeth Sandifer of the TARDIS Eruditorum wrote fascinating things in her essay on Genesis of the Daleks (and elsewhere) about the Daleks as demons of staticness — “being without becoming” made mutated flesh. Let us expand that and amend it slightly: the Daleks are characters without an ending. With their story irreparably cut off, they can only linger beyond their natural 'death', to haunt later stories with their unfinished business. 

The fundamental paradox of the “Daleks as space conquerors” approach is, of course, that robot suits designed as perfectly adapted to staying in a custom-made metal city are now being touted as the ultimate in interstellar warfare; well, in true metaesthetic fashion, I posit that their strange mystique relies equally on being taken out of their proper story. Plucked out of time just before what should have been their natural end-point, with the chances of that future ever coming to pass becoming more unthinkable with every return appearance. 

Let's recap. The Daleks. They're cut off from their own time, their own people… “one day”, they shall come back… yes, one day… (except, well, not really). 

Sound familiar? 

No wonder they are soon to become the Doctor's archenemies. 

***

Next week, we will see what notorious literary inspiration rears its head when the third alien race and the Daleks' disculpations are cut off from the equation, leaving a daft yet handsome people and the degenerate, subterranean, yet highly intelligent monsters who prey on them.

And the week after that, we take a look at what we're left with in The Dead Planet. If The Survivors's pacifist, humanist outlook on war and prejudice relied so heavily on that ending that makes all the difference, then what is The Dead Planet saying, in its current form? And the difference between the two plots is not only that the third alien race fails to descend, leading to the Daleks' death. No, no, no. Another, cheaper, yet much stranger plot-point was added in The Dead Planet compared to The Survivors. But what does it mean?

YARVELLING - “Introduction of the Daleks”

At first glance, the Daleks are an extremely simple concept. Robots from outer space. Galactic invaders. Yet another watered-down variant of “the Nazis, only they're evil aliens”. A disgusting little gremlin hiding in a metal suit. All very familiar tropes. 

Yet here I am in 2019, marvelling at a history that has lasted over 50 years, and setting out to draft the Daleks' complete history — from even before their very first appearance in 1963 to the new Dalek Civil War that may constitute the 2020 Doctor Who Christmas special, if rumours are to be believed. Why? What makes the Daleks such an endless source of fascination ? How did they transcend the status of “stock sci-fi baddies” to become the unique and enticing myth they are today? 

The first answer, of course, is that rather than yet another Tin Man, the Dalek looks like this. 

Undoubtedly, as soon as you go from "robot monster" to "robot monster shaped like a pepper pot", you've got something. That Ray Cusick is many times more the father of the Daleks than Terry Nation ever was is a bit of contrarian fan wisdom that is worth repeating. Yet that answer isn't entirely satisfying, is it? Daleks are undoubtedly cool, unique things to look at, but so's Ro-Man. 

So what is the secret of the Daleks? …How should I know? This is only the introduction. I have, of course, seen Dalek stories before, and thought about these things before. Quite a bit, actually. But conceptually speaking, this is where the journey begins. It may be years before I arrive at some sort of an answer, but in the meantime, I'll have had some fun, and hopefully, so will you. 

Yarvelling will update every week-end  (or thereabouts) for the foreseeable future, featuring my thoughts on the variety of media featuring the Daleks, taken in chronological order. 

Of course, no robot monster is an island, and for that reason we'll occasionally take short side-steps into contemporary stories which provide an interesting background or backdrop to what I have to say about the Dalek stories. Unlike the Dalek stories themselves, these features won't strictly be chronological, but rather come out just ahead of the Dalek story which they are most interesting when paired with; it is perfectly possible that something from the 1990's will be sandwiched in-between the entires on Rob Shearman's Dalek and R.T. Davies's Bad Wolf, and suchlike. 

Although you may also choose to use Blogger's Archive features, I will maintain a masterlist of the critiques in their intended chronological order. 

Oh, and… please comment. It is your destiny. Obey! Obey! OBEYYYYYYY!