Immature Fans and the New Adventures
By Richard PrekodravacAs it appeared in Broadsword issue oneThe New Adventures was heralded into Doctor Who by the closing paragraphs in Rona Munro’s Survival. Peter Darvill-Evans, then publisher of the Television series novelisations, developed an idea of what seemed to be a new direction for Doctor Who.As the idea for the “completely original Doctor Who novels”3 progressed, it became clear that these `new adventures’ were for a mature adult audience.Since 1991, what was mature was questioned after the release of John Peel’s Genesys. Often the response was that the book was immature, rather than mature. Personally that question was never answered, particularly after the inclusion of Andrew Cartmel’s Warhead, and Ben Aaronovitch’s Transit. As I read the reviews, and letters about these books, I wondered whether these responses, were the responses of people who never quite reached maturity themselves.My question is: have immature fans been a hindrance for the New Adventures? When I began the research for this article it had never occurred to me that maturity and morality were linked. As I found reading through Data Extracts and Doctor Who Monthlies, many of the writers, considered morality to be an important factor to maturity.The question of maturity is now also a question of morality.The conceptualisation of morality and maturity are primarily based upon the decisions of society. What we consider thus to be moral, or a mature behaviour is thus relative to the attitudes of that society.Infanticide, abortion, and contraception, tend to be key differences between different cultures, as morality is based upon the values of that culture. Mature behavioural responses tend to differ within the framework of violence. As an example, some nations consider war to be a justified action, case in point, … the conflict in Bosnia.Essentially, there is no absolute moral code or mature behaviour. But what our Western Society considers to be mature or moral, is maturity which is closer to an absolute position than morality.People within our society agree more upon maturity, primarily because it is closely established by the laws of our society. Whereas, morality is far more splintered within our society. Even among Catholics, some Catholics would support contraceptive measures to be moral, when dogma teaches that it is not. Similarly abortion, Gay and Lesbian rights, and so forth, are represented by their different groups.All these different groups though recognise maturity. I don’t think our society has established groups with different mature codes, except perhaps Skinheads with their brand of Fascism.So far I have established general philosophical principles on morality and maturity, although yet to define these terms with respect to the question of this essay.Maturity is embellished by behavioural responses to various situations, based on rules set by society, in particular, non-violent and tolerant attitudes. Morality is based on personal values, from which morals help to define the behaviours of that person.Tolerance and non-violence are themselves moral attitudes. In essence maturity is based upon morality, but not all moral values help to define maturity.In Doctor Who”More adult … isn’t compromising the morals of it’s heroes”4 To clarify a very important point, a book cannot be adult or mature, rather any book cannot have any human qualities you wish to anthropomorphise. By default the series isn’t immature.The idea of adult and mature depends on the reader. An adult book has material that only an adult can cope with, i.e. someone with maturity. Although that isn’t entirely true, the author also must be mature (Genesys?). Secondly, if morals are being compromised then it depends on that person’s moral attitudes, and not the readers. The reader should allow that character to come to any decision, not the reader.Thus an immature fan is someone who isn’t tolerant of someone’s different moral stance. I make this point as these immature fans attempt to condemn the series by appealing to their moral values as right and rejecting other people’s values, or rather deny that they have any.Whether there is absolute truth or morals, is a question that has yet to be proven. I have already given some arguments for relative perspective. Incapable of accepting anything that is unique, with a different perspective on Doctor Who has been ignored and trivialised by these immature fans.If Andrew Cartmel thought that Doctor Who was broad enough to justify that there could be a cyberpunk story, there is no excuse for rejecting his perspective on Doctor Who. I could mention that Andrew Cartmel was script editor. I’m sure he is in a position to understand what could be Doctor Who. But then again some of you can’t see past Caves of Androzani.In the end these immature, `spoilt child’ like fans will be left alone, as those fans who are tolerant and who have the maturity to read the NA will have new Doctor Who. Those other fans will be left on the shelf titled Posterity.Footnotes3 Peter Darvill-Evans, 1990, in Rona Munro, Survival. WH Allen & Co.: London.4 David Sharpe, 1993, in Data Extract, 100.