What do you think?
Rate this book
About Time #3
About Time 1970-1974 Seasons 7 to 11 (About Time; The Unauthorized Guide to Dr. Who (Mad Norwegian Press)) 2 Expanded Edition by Wood, Tat, Miles, Lawrence published by Mad Norwegian Press
"About Time" serves as the definitive (albeit unofficial) guide to "Doctor Who" Seasons 7 to 11-the whole of the Jon Pertwee era. Written by Lawrence Miles (Faction Paradox) and Tat Wood (SFX, TV Zone), About Time not only examines the usual continuity concerns (alien races, etc.) in bursting detail, but looks at how the political / social issues of the 1970s affected the show's production. Essays in this volume "When are the UNIT Stories Set?", "Just How Chauvinistic is Doctor Who?" and "When was Regeneration Invented?"
Paperback
First published January 1, 2004
17 people are currently reading
77 people want to read
About the author
Tat Wood
28 books6 followersTat Wood is co-writer (with Lawrence Miles) of the About Time episode guides to the television series Doctor Who. This book series, begun in 2004, emphasises the importance of understanding the series in the context of British politics, culture and science. Volume Six is entirely Wood's work.
Wood has also written for Doctor Who Magazine. In a 1993 edition of "Dreamwatch", he wrote a piece entitled "Hai! Anxiety", in which the Jon Pertwee era of the series was — unusually for the time — held up to sustained criticism.
In addition to this he has written features for various magazines, on subjects as diverse as Crop Circles, Art Fraud, the problems of adapting Children's novels for television and the Piltdown Hoax.
He is also active in Doctor Who fandom, notably as editor of the fanzines Spectrox and Yak Butter Sandwich and Spaceball Ricochet, which mixes academic observations with irreverent humour and visual bricolage. Some of his fan writing was included in the anthology Licence Denied, published in 1997.
For most of 2005 he was the public relations face of the Bangladeshi Women's Society, a charity based in Leyton, East London, and managed to keep his work running a supplementary school separate from his writing.
Wood has also written for Doctor Who Magazine. In a 1993 edition of "Dreamwatch", he wrote a piece entitled "Hai! Anxiety", in which the Jon Pertwee era of the series was — unusually for the time — held up to sustained criticism.
In addition to this he has written features for various magazines, on subjects as diverse as Crop Circles, Art Fraud, the problems of adapting Children's novels for television and the Piltdown Hoax.
He is also active in Doctor Who fandom, notably as editor of the fanzines Spectrox and Yak Butter Sandwich and Spaceball Ricochet, which mixes academic observations with irreverent humour and visual bricolage. Some of his fan writing was included in the anthology Licence Denied, published in 1997.
For most of 2005 he was the public relations face of the Bangladeshi Women's Society, a charity based in Leyton, East London, and managed to keep his work running a supplementary school separate from his writing.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
August 13, 2014
In which Tat Wood does his best to prove that less is more.
The original edition of this was the first in the About Time series. At the time it was a fresh approach for Who guidebooks, which had tended to default to the template set in The Discontinuity Guide. This sought to delve into the fiction of the series with the same rigour that Andrew Pixley investigated production details. And at the heart of it were two of the cleverest men in fandom, walking encyclopaedia Tat Wood and the always provocative Lawrence Miles. At its best the approach was like watching two mates conduct a high class pub debate about the series – funny, provocative and often ludicrous in its inaccuracy. And the later things got the more long winded things got, someone threw his drink over someone else and walked out, and the more you needed a drink to get through the aftermath. This second edition continues the trend towards bloating. As the pilot for the series the first edition looks Kate Moss skinny compared to the other plus size models that followed, so it was a natural candidate to be redone.
First off, the predominance of a single author is comparatively painful. Wood’s humour tends toward the sardonic. Which would be fine, but Wood boasts of a commanding knowledge of pop culture and science, and plays this up so it often comes across as mean spirited and arrogant (even more so when there’s a whole section dedicated to ‘things that don’t make sense’). I like intelligent criticism of Doctor Who but with no-one to play off against this is drier than Death Valley at the height of summer. Which is a major problem in a book which dedicates up to 30 pages of double-columned small print pages to each story.
Second, the fact that it’s apparently been revised to the nth degree, but still lets factual errors slip through – one section, for instance, mangles the spelling of Jeff Astle’s name and also the reasons for England’s notorious elimination from the 1970 World Cup. A willingness to correct errors is laudable, a failure to correct in what seems a weak area for the author is less forgivable.
For all that the cultural background provided is fascinating stuff, as are the ways the author links it all together (even if you need to check the facts much of the time). You’ll get plenty from reading these, but I’m not quite sure if the aridity and mean-spiritedness makes it absolutely worthwhile ploughing through it all.
The original edition of this was the first in the About Time series. At the time it was a fresh approach for Who guidebooks, which had tended to default to the template set in The Discontinuity Guide. This sought to delve into the fiction of the series with the same rigour that Andrew Pixley investigated production details. And at the heart of it were two of the cleverest men in fandom, walking encyclopaedia Tat Wood and the always provocative Lawrence Miles. At its best the approach was like watching two mates conduct a high class pub debate about the series – funny, provocative and often ludicrous in its inaccuracy. And the later things got the more long winded things got, someone threw his drink over someone else and walked out, and the more you needed a drink to get through the aftermath. This second edition continues the trend towards bloating. As the pilot for the series the first edition looks Kate Moss skinny compared to the other plus size models that followed, so it was a natural candidate to be redone.
First off, the predominance of a single author is comparatively painful. Wood’s humour tends toward the sardonic. Which would be fine, but Wood boasts of a commanding knowledge of pop culture and science, and plays this up so it often comes across as mean spirited and arrogant (even more so when there’s a whole section dedicated to ‘things that don’t make sense’). I like intelligent criticism of Doctor Who but with no-one to play off against this is drier than Death Valley at the height of summer. Which is a major problem in a book which dedicates up to 30 pages of double-columned small print pages to each story.
Second, the fact that it’s apparently been revised to the nth degree, but still lets factual errors slip through – one section, for instance, mangles the spelling of Jeff Astle’s name and also the reasons for England’s notorious elimination from the 1970 World Cup. A willingness to correct errors is laudable, a failure to correct in what seems a weak area for the author is less forgivable.
For all that the cultural background provided is fascinating stuff, as are the ways the author links it all together (even if you need to check the facts much of the time). You’ll get plenty from reading these, but I’m not quite sure if the aridity and mean-spiritedness makes it absolutely worthwhile ploughing through it all.
September 26, 2022
The standard response to Tat Wood's revised edition of this volume (more revised editions are due in the coming years) is that less really should have been more. I don't entirely agree, as I'm very attracted by the phrase "exhaustive". Let's be honest, if you're going to a printed book in 2022 to gain insight into an old television series, you're not doing it just to get some facts and figures. Between Wikipedia, the Blu-Rays, and the enviable array of Doctor Who websites, any casual or part-time fan will be more than sated. These books are an old-fashioned idea, to etch an astonishing array of facts and theories in stone, and Wood has successfully carried it out.
The sense of humour about the flawed side of the program is enjoyable, while the detailed examination of the series in light of cultural context is highly valued. For those of us who weren't there in the 1970s or are from across the seas (or both, in my case), it can be easy to forget that most episodes of the program - like most works of fiction in general - played very differently to its original intended audience, who carried with them a head full of symbols, images, social assumptions, tropes, popular culture linkages, actors' names and faces, political understandings, bromides, fairy tales, religious concepts, and attitudes, not to mention being "locked in" to a Saturday evening timeslot in the way that modern viewers to a TV program are not. I think the About Time series is the best overall work to hold one's hand through the experience of diving deep into Who.
(This review is based entirely on the first three volumes, so I cannot speak as to whether the wheels will give out when Wood reaches the oft-criticised 1980s seasons, nor whether his alleged cruelty toward the new series will be warranted.)
Of course, it's not perfect, and the flaws do matter. First of all, as others have noted, lots of little facts are not quite as factual as one would like. There is an entire thread on Gallifrey Base devoted to this, exposing what are mostly minor niggles (surnames of historical figures misspelled, dates slightly incorrect) but do sometimes extend to historical situations being misinterpreted or misrepresented, which is a problem given the book's schoolmasterly tone. Second, could we acknowledge that occasionally the dives go too deep? Sure. There may be one too many footnotes, and one's eyes roll automatically when the footnote is merely explaining a joke made by Wood rather than relating anything to the program. Third, it’s clear that Wood owes a debt to that pioneering 1990s volume on the subject, The Discontinuity Guide, and adopts something of its tone in the intro to each serial. But whereas that volume was written at a time when many fans were unable to see every story, this is the era of streaming and home media (and easy piracy). The entry on “Inferno”, for example, rather beguilingly reads as if it were made for someone who has know hope of seeing the program. I’d like to know of even one reader who decided, in this modern age, that the book was all they needed!
And fourth, yes, it must be said: "schoolmasterly" is how I described the tone, but others might go for "snotty". Whether lecturing us on the music of Stockhausen or the relationship between Wales and its parent, the United Kingdom, Wood has chosen to approach this book like an expert introducing new immigrants to a culture. Often that's welcomed, as I mentioned earlier, when it places the program into its context. But by the time he's explaining what "beans on toast" are (thanks, Tat!), it's a tad dispiriting. Yes, my American partner wouldn't understand baked beans, but in this situation it is a thoroughly unnecessary interjection designed to make English culture sound like something thrillingly esoteric. It makes for a discombobulating experience, as he clearly wants to write for both ignorant millennials like myself and interested armchair Who scholars of his own generation. Sometimes, thus, he leans toward the "this funny thing happened in 1971 and, no, I'm not lying!" while other times he casually mentions multiple television programs or bands with the expectation they'll be familiar to us. It's an uneven mix that comes from his desire to write a book that is all things for all people, which perhaps also explains its length.
Those are not complaints, just honest criticisms. I'm having great fun revisiting the series in its entirety for the first time since I discovered it back in the late 2000s; it's a privilege to have Wood by my side... even if I'm reminded sometimes of how my partner's eyes glaze over when I rabbit on about the exact order of Shakespeare's plays. This book replicates the feeling of having an excessively nerdy friend tie you to a chair and not let you leave until you've listened to his entire PhD in one hit. Indeed, my relationship with Wood is rather how I imagine the Doctor felt about K-9: it's exceptionally nice to have you here, I appreciate what you bring to the team, and I couldn't survive without you. But when you're not required, please go back in the cupboard. There's a good dog.
The sense of humour about the flawed side of the program is enjoyable, while the detailed examination of the series in light of cultural context is highly valued. For those of us who weren't there in the 1970s or are from across the seas (or both, in my case), it can be easy to forget that most episodes of the program - like most works of fiction in general - played very differently to its original intended audience, who carried with them a head full of symbols, images, social assumptions, tropes, popular culture linkages, actors' names and faces, political understandings, bromides, fairy tales, religious concepts, and attitudes, not to mention being "locked in" to a Saturday evening timeslot in the way that modern viewers to a TV program are not. I think the About Time series is the best overall work to hold one's hand through the experience of diving deep into Who.
(This review is based entirely on the first three volumes, so I cannot speak as to whether the wheels will give out when Wood reaches the oft-criticised 1980s seasons, nor whether his alleged cruelty toward the new series will be warranted.)
Of course, it's not perfect, and the flaws do matter. First of all, as others have noted, lots of little facts are not quite as factual as one would like. There is an entire thread on Gallifrey Base devoted to this, exposing what are mostly minor niggles (surnames of historical figures misspelled, dates slightly incorrect) but do sometimes extend to historical situations being misinterpreted or misrepresented, which is a problem given the book's schoolmasterly tone. Second, could we acknowledge that occasionally the dives go too deep? Sure. There may be one too many footnotes, and one's eyes roll automatically when the footnote is merely explaining a joke made by Wood rather than relating anything to the program. Third, it’s clear that Wood owes a debt to that pioneering 1990s volume on the subject, The Discontinuity Guide, and adopts something of its tone in the intro to each serial. But whereas that volume was written at a time when many fans were unable to see every story, this is the era of streaming and home media (and easy piracy). The entry on “Inferno”, for example, rather beguilingly reads as if it were made for someone who has know hope of seeing the program. I’d like to know of even one reader who decided, in this modern age, that the book was all they needed!
And fourth, yes, it must be said: "schoolmasterly" is how I described the tone, but others might go for "snotty". Whether lecturing us on the music of Stockhausen or the relationship between Wales and its parent, the United Kingdom, Wood has chosen to approach this book like an expert introducing new immigrants to a culture. Often that's welcomed, as I mentioned earlier, when it places the program into its context. But by the time he's explaining what "beans on toast" are (thanks, Tat!), it's a tad dispiriting. Yes, my American partner wouldn't understand baked beans, but in this situation it is a thoroughly unnecessary interjection designed to make English culture sound like something thrillingly esoteric. It makes for a discombobulating experience, as he clearly wants to write for both ignorant millennials like myself and interested armchair Who scholars of his own generation. Sometimes, thus, he leans toward the "this funny thing happened in 1971 and, no, I'm not lying!" while other times he casually mentions multiple television programs or bands with the expectation they'll be familiar to us. It's an uneven mix that comes from his desire to write a book that is all things for all people, which perhaps also explains its length.
Those are not complaints, just honest criticisms. I'm having great fun revisiting the series in its entirety for the first time since I discovered it back in the late 2000s; it's a privilege to have Wood by my side... even if I'm reminded sometimes of how my partner's eyes glaze over when I rabbit on about the exact order of Shakespeare's plays. This book replicates the feeling of having an excessively nerdy friend tie you to a chair and not let you leave until you've listened to his entire PhD in one hit. Indeed, my relationship with Wood is rather how I imagine the Doctor felt about K-9: it's exceptionally nice to have you here, I appreciate what you bring to the team, and I couldn't survive without you. But when you're not required, please go back in the cupboard. There's a good dog.
February 20, 2025
I borrowed this from the library as a kind of companion as I was watching the Pertwee era of Doctor Who and I discovered the following things:
1. The authors really did not seem to care for Jo Grant. Now, granted (no pun intended), the writing for her was all over the place. She's so often written as a bit thick and ditzy, but what is also there is that she's loyal and kind. She's also got backbone, and more often than not withstands the Doctor's less-than-kind behavior, and has a settled sense of self - she seems to understand that she herself isn't meant for the business of running around time and space with the Doctor, even if she never truly seems to admit it until the end of Planet of the Daleks - and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with that at all. But the authors seemed to delight taking a dump all over Jo a bit more than was really necessary. Bottom line? Bah, who cares if someone didn't like Jo - *I* adored her.
2. The book also managed to deep my love for the Master, specifically Roger Delgado's interpretation, the bedrock on which the character was built. That's it. That's the point.
Overall, a good companion to the Pertwee era, even if it was quite the brick to have to read.
1. The authors really did not seem to care for Jo Grant. Now, granted (no pun intended), the writing for her was all over the place. She's so often written as a bit thick and ditzy, but what is also there is that she's loyal and kind. She's also got backbone, and more often than not withstands the Doctor's less-than-kind behavior, and has a settled sense of self - she seems to understand that she herself isn't meant for the business of running around time and space with the Doctor, even if she never truly seems to admit it until the end of Planet of the Daleks - and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with that at all. But the authors seemed to delight taking a dump all over Jo a bit more than was really necessary. Bottom line? Bah, who cares if someone didn't like Jo - *I* adored her.
2. The book also managed to deep my love for the Master, specifically Roger Delgado's interpretation, the bedrock on which the character was built. That's it. That's the point.
Overall, a good companion to the Pertwee era, even if it was quite the brick to have to read.
March 5, 2025
Alright, but Wood by himself needs someone both to keep him focused and to avoid sprawling excessively and to counteract some of his more contentious opinions. (In particular, for this volume he really needed a collaborator who actually *liked* the Pertwee era, which he clearly didn't.) Full review: https://fakegeekboy.wordpress.com/202...
January 13, 2021
Brilliant
Quite literally everything you needed, and didn’t need, to know about Pertwees Doctor. This series is packed with details and essays about everything Who related and this one is no different. Highly recommended!
Quite literally everything you needed, and didn’t need, to know about Pertwees Doctor. This series is packed with details and essays about everything Who related and this one is no different. Highly recommended!
February 17, 2021
This is an exhaustive analysis of the Jon Pertwee years of the long running series Doctor Who. Like other volumes in the series, this is extremely insightful and unflinchingly critical of the beloved series.
November 18, 2024
The further I get, the more I speed-read the facts and handpick what interests me. It's still worth the Read, of course, but I do struggle to maintain my interest in everything being discussed. There's a little bit for everyone, I guess.
Read
December 23, 2009"http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1256014.html[return][return]I read the first edition of this two years ago, since when it has been sitting on the shelf with the other volumes of this superb series of handbooks to Doctor Who, looking a bit thin in comparison with its fellows. This second edition is massively expanded from the first, with most of the new material simply being more of the same excellent analysis of the programme's context (in this case the early 1970s) plus a lot more analytical essays and 147 endnotes (which is 142 more than in the first edition; though I repeat my complaint about them being endnotes rather than footnotes). There is loads more information about what was going on behind the scenes, most of which is very interesting; my own recent back problems make me very sympathetic to Jon Pertwee. A welcome shift in Wood's attitude has him attempting to incorporate New Who continuity into Old Who analysis, rather than the invective he was previously lapsing into; this offers him room for writing such essays as 'All Right, Then... Where Were Torchwood?' and additional evidence for 'When are the Unit Stories Set?' There are a couple of other standout pieces, 'Why Did We Countdown to TV Action?' on the early 1970s Doctor Who comics, and 'Why Didn't Plaid Cymru Lynch Barry Letts?' which ostensibly attempts to explain Wales to Americans but actually has a lot of good points to make.[return][return]When I read the first edition of this I hadn't yet seen all the Pertwee stories, and tended to go and look them up in Wood and Miles after I had finished watching them. Now I want to watch several of them again to see the things I missed first time around. An excellent handbook, and I am very glad that Wood is planning a seventh volume to cover the first years of New Who."
Read
October 21, 2007http://nhw.livejournal.com/927416.html[return][return]Though third in chronological sequence, this was the first of the About Time series published, covering precisely the years of Jon Pertwee as the third Doctor, and almost as precisely the years of Barry Letts as producer and Terrance Dicks as script editor. It's a huge change of setting for the show with almost two thirds of the 24 stories - including the whole of the first Pertwee season - set on contemporary Earth with the UNIT team. (Compare precisely one contemporary adventure, plus some odd bits and pieces [including the first ever episode], of the 29 Hartnell stories, and a fairly steady rate of 10-20% for the remainder of the classic series; compare, of course, also 100% of the eighth Doctor's on-screen adventures, and a third of the stories since the 2005 revival.)[return][return]Miles and Wood have done a very good job of identifying the roots of each story, literary, political and televisual. It's not yet at the levels of genius that their Volume 2 reached, but there are some glorious moments, including the frightening similarities between Jon Pertwee, Jimmy Saville and Bruce Forsythe. They have also yet to give in to the unfortunate enthusiasm for endnotes which is one of the few really annoying things about later volumes. (The five fairly restrained end-notes here concern Enoch Powell, Oswald Mosley, Sooty and Sweep, the aforementioned Bruce Forsythe, and Catweazle.) There are the usual discursive essays, of which the two best are probably on the importance of the incidental music and on the implied history of UK politics in Doctor Who.
July 25, 2014
Mad Norwegian's About Time series is the most in-depth critical resource on Doctor Who. Each book gives you facts on characters, monsters, planets and the production, as well as critiques, contextual explorations and nitpicking. In addition, there are essays on various subjects the tie into the mythology of the entire show. The series started with Vol.3, presumably because the Pertwee era was a better seller than the black and white worlds of the first and second Doctors, but ironically, because it was first, it was the thinnest volume by far at 180 pages covering 5 seasons. After all 8 of the original Doctors had been covered, one of the writers, Tat Wood, came out with the Expanded 2nd Edition. Pertwee's volume now stands as the thickest, telling the tale in 507 pages. It's practically all re-written, with material added to practically every paragraph, with additional essays no less. Time has made it possible for Wood to react to reader feedback and explore new theories. He's also using the New Series for information, something that was rarely mentioned in earlier volumes. It took me a long time to read it because I never wanted to get ahead of my daily Doctor Who reviews. So when I'd be done with a Pertwee story, I'd give myself permission to read its lengthy entry. As usual, I'm not always in agreement with About Time's assessments, but it's always got me thinking. The latter half of the book does seem to have more typos than usual, but in a monster book like this, that was kind of bound to happen. My only complaint really. Bring on Volume 7 and the New Series, Master Wood!
September 8, 2007
No, I didn't watch the entirety of the Third Doctor's Tenure (and read the accompanying book) in the one month since I finished About Time 2. Apparently when the writers first started putting out the About Time series, they had no idea if the books would be successful or if they would be a big flop. So instead of starting with the guidebooks at the beginning, focussing on the less well-known first two Doctors of the black-and-white era, they began the guidebook series with the color era, pushed forward, and then jumped back to the beginning. As a result, Vol. 2 hadn't yet been released until I was already watching the Third Doctor, leading to me reading About Time Vols 2 & 3 simultaneously.
May 8, 2015
I really enjoyed the volumes on Hartnell and Troughton, but I really wish I had purchased the first edition of the Pertwee volume rather than the (ridiculously bloated) second edition. As another reviewer here put it, Tat Wood has provided the world with an excellent example of why the phrase "less is more" was invented. The extra essays in the Hartnell and Troughton volumes were entertaining and/or informative. Most of the extra essays and copious end notes in this volume are unnecessary and they often seem self-indulgent, condescending, and irritating, especially when Wood decides to edumacate us ignorant Yanks and Aussies about British culture.
July 12, 2009
I haven't read the first edition of this text,but the second edition is probably the most jam-packed and lovingly detailed volume in this jam-packed and lovingly detailed series. I get the distinct impression that Jon Pertwee is "Tat Wood's Doctor", so to speak, and a real love for the series and for British popular culture of the 1970s in general shines through.
This book also reminded me how many Pertwee stories I've yet to see. I'm looking forward to going back and consulting this book again when I've seen them.
This book also reminded me how many Pertwee stories I've yet to see. I'm looking forward to going back and consulting this book again when I've seen them.
February 3, 2013
I love this series! I wish someone would write a guide this thorough, brainy, and irreverent about Star Trek. I read it as a get to see a new story, and find myself laughing out loud at some of the observations. Awesome.
May 9, 2012
This is the expanded edition of volume 3...out of a set of 6 utterly fabulous analysis & opinion works on "Doctor Who". It's always fascinating, occasionally infuriating, and usually thought-provoking...all around, an excellent read AND an excellent media critique.
August 20, 2020
Not quite as obsessively detailed as other volumes in this series, but that is actually in its favor.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews