Doctor Who and the role of religion
Posted by dailypop on December 14, 2011
Reverend Wainright has a moment of doubt in Curse of Fenric
Classic Doctor Who has a rather tentative relationship with organized religion, usually depicting members of black magic cults as being evil or misguided by some mastermind or alien.
The Pertwee adventure The Daemons went so far as to include the Master operating as a vicar in disguise and offered up the revelation that mankind had evolved as part of a plot concocted by aliens that looked like massive devils.
Faith was a key factor in the 1989 adventure The Curse of Fenric and shown to have a real power over those who had lost their souls to darkness.
The Doctor has fought ‘gods’ on several occasions from Pyramids of Mars to The Greatest Show in the Galaxy, so clearly such a concept exists in that universe… but what about Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Hindu beliefs? What role do they play?
The program is over 48 years old and has had several writers, directors and producers steering Doctor Who in specific directions. Barry Letts reflected his Buddhist beliefs during his tenure but this was tempered by the view of conservative script editor Terrance Dicks. Russel T Davies, by contrast, referred to the Doctor as a Lonely God’ and even featured ‘Brights Movement’ proponent Richard Dawkins in an episode.
This makes a definitive statement on the role of religion in Doctor Who difficult to pin down. I do recall a moment in one of the Missing Episodes Books, The Ultimate Evil when the Doctor said ‘My God!’ that took fans by surprise so religion is clearly a controversial subject for the program.
Award-winning author Naomi Alderman (an orthodox Jew) spoke to the folks at the Jewish Journal about her book Doctor Who: Borrowed Time and the role of religious belief in Doctor Who. I found it very interesting and have posted an excerpt below:
What I found compelling was that Naomi had been raised as an orthodox Jew and further, that her first novel, the Orange award winning and controversial “Disobedience,” depicted a rabbi’s daughter from North London who comes out as a lesbian. In short, there’s a rich history brewing in Naomi’s noggin and I, for one, wanted to get inside. What follows is a brief interview:
Q: The Doctor never seems to deal with actual religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc) but rather faux “orders”. Assuming this is done so as not offend, is it possible that the show is missing an opportunity to explore something seemingly fundamental to human nature?
Hmmm, interesting. In fact, there has been some portrayal of actual religion, including a positive portrayal of Buddhism in Planet of the Spiders. But I suspect that the answer is that the UK is a fundamentally not-very-religious country, and that Doctor Who accurately represents our suspicions and our non-confrontational but deep-rooted agnosticism. To go back in history and have the Doctor ‘prove’ that Moses, Jesus and Mohammed didn’t exist would clearly be offensive and far too confrontational for British people. But to have him meet the ‘prophet’ or ‘god’ of an imaginary civilization and find that they are either misguided or plain manipulative I think is a way of saying what – dare I say it? – most British people quietly think about religion: that it’s fine as long as it’s comforting, but shouldn’t be taken too seriously or followed blindly. The Doctor is an atheist hero.
Being an American, I can’t speak on the validity of Alderman’s statement on the importance of religion in the UK, but I think even if I lived in downtown London I’d refrain from making such a blanket statement. The deification of the Doctor in the BBC Wales version is a rather strange turn of events as he has become the ultimate power in the universe.
There’s even a revised (Time) Lord’s Prayer that was posted online which I find incredibly questionable and frankly in bad taste.
What role do you think religion has in Doctor Who?
David Kenyon said
I personally dont think there is anything wrong with having religion dealt with in a positive or negative way..but the story’s plot has got to be paramount no matter what the directors or producers modus operandi is. Some of the best Doctor Who stories have involved religious icongraphy to move the story to a new level or political messages or pastiches that are culturally significant. It’s up to the viewer then to either ‘take it or leave it’. Alot of times fantasy and scifi has a mission to ‘kill God’ and replace it with facts or fiction which I think is abit shallow no matter what your beliefs are. I think we should be questioning our mortality and immortality daily and evolve as human beings, no matter what our religious or non religious views may be…and if a show like Doctor Who can get people thinking about the ‘bigger pictures’ and themes within our world then Im more than happy to explore.
dailypop said
Interesting take, thanks for the reply!
Hal said
Well, this is interesting. The UK or, specifically, England is I think much more secular than the United States. Note the power of the religious Right in your country and the way that presidential candidates seem to be required to state some (Christian) religious belief despite the divorcement of Church and State being one of the important bases of the US (otherwise you’d run the risk of having the monarchical maniacs of England’s past and that of other countries) with the result that you have had presidents who have stated a literal belief in the fundamentalist Christian concept of the End Times which is scary, what is scarier is that this has become more common not less so. In contrast Tony Blair converted to Catholicism only when he *left* office this is scary in its own way as he surely is serious about his faith but was so cynical that he only made a public commitment after he had enjoyed power. It does suggest a difference between the UK and the US. In the UK the religious belief of a candidate should be beside the point unless it affects the ability to govern (did Blair see the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as a crusade and the fight against terrorism too? He wouldn’t say so but Bush would because Bush could be certain of wider support from some people, Blair on the other hand knew that such a statement would lead to wider opprobrium) in the US candidates often cynically promote their supposed beliefs though they should it should have NO bearing on their job. Therefore we get a hint of different *broad* views of each country so it would have a bearing on Doctor Who! Cont’d
Hal said
It’s worth noting that Star Trek (original subtitleless version) had many episodes in which a “god”or object of faith is revealed to be a sham or plain malevolent. Similarly the crew represented a thrusting 1960s Americanism but they were notably shorn of familiar religious beliefs in at least an explicit way, so even though A Private Little War is right-leaning and sees Rodenberry subscribing to the domino theory with a take on the Vietnam War while the execrable Omega Glory is a rather racist hymn to a conservative view of America and the world(the thuggish “good guys” are white Yangs with a garbled version of the Pledge of Allegiance while the bad guys are asiatic Kohms, hm subtle!) there is no point when “religion” is shown to make the Federation right, they aren’t shown as the chosen in any spiritual sense. Therefore Doctor Who isn’t that different. However, Doctor Who *is* at least an agnostic programme, the Doctor *doesn’t* know everything but he does know a lot and he often encounters beings who use religion as a cynical form of social control.
I think that the most problematic era is the current one. Davies an atheist and a predictable one writes the Who Universe (and Botchwood’s) as a godless one, one with nothing after death but at the same time he lifted parts of the myth of Christ and grafted them to his Doctor with the difference that the Davies Doctor (and now the Moffat variant) is a show-off which Jesus is never meant to be. So oddly the Doctor becomes Davies as the Doctor as Jesus which is really weird. There are plenty of modern Christian-themed things that are unfortunately kind of creepy but it took a committed somewhat smug athiest to create the ultra-embarassing floating Jesus-Doctor of The Last of the Time Lords, go figure!
I’m an agnostic but I enjoy It’s a Wonderful Life, I loved much of Quantum Leap, and I liked hoky old Highway to Heaven. At its best Doctor Who encourages thought, fundamentalism be it atheistic or religious cuts it off.
dailypop said
“the Doctor becomes Davies as the Doctor as Jesus which is really weird. ” I used to to refer to Davies and Tennant as a two-headed creature stuffed into each others pants. Maybe that’s different, though. But Davies definitely hammered in his own point of view and philosophy which may be his want but unfortunately the man is so dreadfully shallow and predictable. How he won the Dennis Potter award for writing is beyond me.
I really dislike depicting the Doctor as a ‘Lonely God,’ like some lovesick glamour boy with the power of all creation at his finger tips. This fails to mix with previous iterations that obviously depict the Doctor as a bit of a rogue and a wanderer, very fallible and very mortal. The finale of the previous year, though gut-wrenching, hinted that the Doctor may be changing his ways, which is more of a way of Moffat promising to tone down the cosmic trickster elements of the character. To be honest, he has to. Where else can the program go?
They’ve uncreated the Daleks, rewritten a planet-wide take-over by the Master and destroyed the Daleks (again) to a mythical degree only to see them come right back. The recreation of the entire universe seemed to be the pinnacle of these overblown finales, but last year’s unraveling of time resolved by the Doctor getting married was just absurd.
Hal said
“…a two-headed creature stuffed into each other’s pants”, yes, that IS different… and grotesque, that’s the kind of image I’ll really have to scrub out of my brain! I could hardly agree more about Davies being dreadfully shallow and predictable. Have you seen Second Coming? It was Davies’s drama about Jesus being reincarnated as a Mancunian “everyman” played by everyone’s favourite miserable jug-eared Salfordian Professional Northerner Chris Eccleston. It played out *just* the way you’d expect with people basically saying that they don’t need God anymore at the end, it couldn’t be anymore predictable if it tried. Of course it was praised to the skies. The weird thing is that when fundamentalist Christian abominations like that Left Behind crap is made they are ridiculed not just for their poor quality but for the tedious predictability of the “philosophy” and the propaganda behind them, yet when an atheist like the Boy Russell produces something that is equally as tedious in *its* “philosophy” and propaganda it is praised, even though you’d need to possess a pebble for a brain not to know where it was going and despite the fact that it is impossible to reconcile even gentle humanistic Christian belief with Davies’s brand of off-the-peg smug atheism.
Oddly, as you mention, Davies then saddles The Doctor with this Lonely God b.s. (tho’ that phrase was in a Moffat script) despite it not fitting the character. I suspect Davies sees himself as a non-lonely god of sorts, The Writer’s Tale sees him suck up to himself enough!
The New Doctor Who trapped itself with the preposterous escalation of the season finales, it may not be able to save itself as the more idiotic audience members have come to expect it though it leads to bad storytelling. Bigger ain’t always better. As for the Potter Award it merely says something about degraded tastes and reduced expectation. Heh heh heh.