About Time: The Unauthorized Guide to Doctor Who, #2: 1966-1969, Seasons 4 to 6

About Time #2

by Tat Wood, Lawrence Miles

Constituting the largest reference work on "Doctor Who" ever written, the six-volume "About Time" strives to become the ultimate reference guide to the world's longest-running science fiction program. Written by Lawrence Miles ("Faction Paradox") and long-time sci-fi commentator Tat Wood, "About Time" focuses on the continuity of "Doctor Who" (its characters, alien races and the like), but also examines the show as a work of social commentary. In particular, Miles and Wood dissect the politics and social issues that shaped the show during its unprecedented 26-year run (from 1963 to 1989), detailing how the issues of the day influenced this series. As part of this grand opus, About Time 2 examines "Doctor Who" Seasons 4 to 6 (1966 to 1969) -- a massive paradigm shift for the show, as Patrick Troughton takes over the lead role. Among other things, About Time 2 answers such vitally important "Who" questions as "What's the Timeline of the Cybermen?," "Whatever Happened to the USA?" and "Did Sergeant Pepper Know the Doctor?"

Genres: Doctor Who, Nonfiction, Reference, Essays, Media Tie In, Criticism, Tv

304 pages, Paperback

First published November 30, 2006

About the author

Tat 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.

Reviews

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another brilliant installment in the "About Time" series. Does it maintain the high level of quality? If anything, this and About Time 1 (Seasons 1 to 3) are the best of the bunch, not because they are especially revelatory in reevaluating lost, 1960s stories - I actually have a bit of trouble accepting some of Wood's and Miles' assertions on the quality of stories I've only heard, once, on ropey cassette tape - but because they allow these earliest of Doctor Who stories, a valuable portal to another, lost version of the world, to be seen or heard in something of their original social context. Even an American can grasp the influence of the "Quatermass" serials on the early 1970s, or the video generation on the mid-80s, but general knowledge of events and culture that influence the '60s in Britain sort of begins and ends with the Beatles and World War Two. Not to say those aren't important, mind - but there's a lot more to it than that.

As usual, sometimes I find myself agreeing heartily with the authors ("The Evil of the Daleks," "The Mind Robber") and sometimes I couldn't think they are more wrong ("The Abominable Snowmen"), but I always come out understanding the position they're coming from and what evidence they're using to back up their claims. Which is more than just about any other 'episode guide' available for any other series.

Volume 3 was good, Volume 4 was better, Volume 5 was fantastic and Volume 1 and Volume 2 are tied for best yet. How can Volume 6 possibly let me down?

[Wendy · Rating 5 out of 5]

In keeping with the usual high standards of this series. This book covers the era of the show that I'm least familiar with - of the stories covered here, I've only seen "The Mind Robber" and "Tomb of the Cybermen" (once, fifteen years ago, and I barely remember any of it). Because I know this era of the show mostly through the nostalgic memories of other fans, it's a bit surprising to discover that Miles and Wood generally rate the era lower than the preceeding Hartnell era in terms of its overall innovativeness and in the quality of the stories. They certainly have a point about the innovation - this was the era which saw the "base under siege by monsters from outer space" story eclipse all other story types. Anyway, it's made me quite curious to go watch some more of the existing stories from this period of Doctor Who.

[Rick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh my giddy Aunt. These books are fantastic. They're brilliant. They're funny. And they're informative. Do not hesitate, if you're a Whovian or just a fan - you need these books. Seriously.

[Jay Emmerich · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another lovely entry in this series. Solidly walking the line of informational text with a playful tone, as well as utilizing some really really well done essays about various things that were connected to the show. As always, the stand outs are the "Where did this come from?" on top of the previously mentioned essays. I read this one significantly quicker than the last, and maybe that's because I was more motivated, or that I found it more interesting? I'm not sure entirely. But I'll get around to reading the third volume at some point. This puts me more or less up to date with the part of the show I'm actively watching as I read it. The biggest issue with the book (and it's not an awful issue, if I could make this 4.5, I would,) is that the text can get a little bland and repetitive if you read it too quickly. This is a great resource for any kind of academic paper written about early Doctor Who.

[Greg Callahan · Rating 5 out of 5]

(4.5) Same as the first, you get precisely what you're seeking here. Solid facts and lore about the making of the show and fun behind-the-scenes tidbits. However, I do think the writer's biases come through a bit too often. It's not really a problem, but I just feel like I'd prefer an unbiased description of the times and decisions without all the callouts to the more stupid elements of the show. I will say, however, and do so unashamedly, that I have finally discovered which segments of the story deconstruction I'm most interested in and which segments I can simply skim through. So that's nice.

[Arthur B · Rating 4 out of 5]

Decent continuation of the encyclopedic resource, though again the lack of citations of sources mean it's not quite what it could be. Full review: https://fakegeekboy.wordpress.com/202...

[Anne]

There seems very little chance I'm actually going to finish this so I'm shuffling it off to my DNF shelf.

[Art Lyon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly well-researched and unbelievably in-depth.

[Nicholas Whyte]

http://nhw.livejournal.com/809156.html[return][return]This series is a wonderful cornucopia of facts and analysis of the early years of everyone's favourite Time Lord. I think the second volume, dealing with the last two William Hartnell stories and the Patrick Troughton era, actually exceeds the high standard set by the first volume. Again, we have the exhaustive picking apart of each story looking for its sources of inspiration, broken up by substantive essays on more-or-less relevant topics - the one near the end, "Does Plot Matter", has considerable analytical depth and genre-wide interest - I hope someone (like perhaps Strange Horizons?) might consider approaching the authors to put it on-line for general information.[return][return]Lots of things I loved about this book. The vicious wit with which the authors savage any aspects of their favourite series that they disapprove of. (The chapter on every single story has a section devoted to Things That Don't Make Sense. Sometimes these sections are long, and sometimes they are longer.) Wood and Miles seem to particularly enjoy being able to argue at forty years' distance with Innes Lloyd, who was producer of the programme for much of this time, on the grounds that he betrayed the original Verity Lambert concept. Lloyd has been dead since 1991 and so can't argue back. But the tone is witty rather than polemical and myself I think a more balanced view of Lloyd's achievements emerges from these pages despite the authors' efforts.[return][return]Two minor mysteries that had troubled me in the last few months are explained: i) Colin Baker's narration of The Macra Terror is terrible not because Colin Baker is reading it but because John Nathan Turner wrote it; ii) Ian Marter's novelisation of The Enemy of the World is incomprehensible because the publisher slashed large chunks out of it to bring it down to the right page count. There is learned discussion of i) whose accent is the worst in the entire history of Doctor Who, ii) whether or not anyone in the TARDIS (Doctor excepted) ever had sex, and iii) the possible alchemical significance of mercury in the works of David Whitaker. There is constant mockery of Victoria. And there is a very thoughtful piece on why The Power of the Daleks is such a good story. I read it all except the chapter on The Mind Robber, because the authors insist very strongly that you should see it in all its glory first.[return][return](One small nit-pick - The Third Man is set in Vienna, not Berlin, which was divided into four parts, not three. But this is tangential to its likely influence on The Invasion.)[return][return]I cannot imagine that future volumes in this series can possibly be as good as this one - but I shall buy them anyway.

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

More Doctor Who geekiness, this time focussing on the tenure of the Second Doctor, Patrick Troughton. What's really amazing about these books is not just the depth of their intelligence, but the breadth. In addition to the enjoyable fan-wankery typical of such guides - obsessive continuity, objective critiques, behind-the-scenes lore, etc. - nearly every story has an accompanying essay, sometimes only tangentially related. A selection of titles include "Did Sergeant Pepper Know the Doctor?", "How Buddhist is this Series?", "Does Plot Matter?" "Did Doctor Who End in 1969?" and "Cultural Primer: Why the Radio Times?" Look, sounding smart about one thing is easy, and sounding smart about a TV show isn't much of a stretch. But it's typical for these essays to reference or touch on such a vast array of seemingly unrelated subjects while answering their proposed question; the essay "What Planet Was David Whitaker On?" references the four elements and the quintessence, Roman gods and their metallic & planetary counterparts, cinnabar & the secret of immortality, the four humours, "the mercury tumbler-switches of wartime bombs" ... And that's just various elements of one essay among many. (The essays that focus more on the sociological and cultural developments of the 1960s are even more fascinating.) Eric & William have been borrowing these books after I finish them and likewise enjoying them immensely - and, since they (unlike me) have not been watching all the episodes that the guide talks about, that's pretty noteworthy.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow this book contains a lot of information! If you're interested in the history of Doctor Who, in this particular case the Patrick Troughton era, then this book is for you. It goes into almost ridiculous levels of detail on everything, sometimes to the point where your head hurts, but it's very detailed and in places utterly fascinating.