This is unironically the greatest Doctor Who story of all time.
Quite a loaded statement to begin this one with, but I stand by it and I intend to use this blog post to justify it. After all, here at The A-Z of Classic Who, loaded statements are our speciality.
Not that it needs justifying - this is of course universally loved as the perfect masterpiece it is and everyone agrees with me about it. Look at all these quotes in agreement!
- "Overrated but good story"
- "Fantastic but not flawless"
- "One of the best but necessarily drawn out"
- "A strong offering from Robert Holmes, showing why he was one of the best script editors."
- "Wouldn't have been thought of as fondly if it wasn't a Dalek serial"
- "It's filled with iconic moments and imagination, but does have some padding"
Fine, maybe the opinion isn't quite as unanimous as I'd like. Which is fine, obviously opinions exist, and when a story is so universally lauded for so long, the contrarians are bound to come out of the woodwork. Hell, I'm that contrarian when it comes to a large number of NuWho episodes (Blink is shit come at me irl) so I do get it. But here I intend to prove everyone wrong in my usual well thought out, analytical style. So it won't be well thought out or analytical in any way at all.
 |
| haters get rekt |
I do intend to provide a bit of structure to this blog post, by setting my insufferable lauding of this story into three categories: visually, thematically and character... err... ally.
Visually
While Terry Nation (and as one of the quotes alluded to above, probably Robert Holmes to a great extent) takes most of the credit regarding this episode's success, director David Maloney, along with the rest of the production team must take their share of the spoils. This story looks really great.
For a start, the production design is mostly excellent - yes, it's a bit seventies naff, but I'm willing to excuse it on the grounds that (and this might be a bit of a stretch) it was made in the seventies. The sets of the Kaled and Thal bases have the look of a war torn but methodical society, and the clean, angular lines have more than a subtle hint of the Nazi influence. The location work at the beginning is mostly solid, with credit definitely being due to the production team for making it feel like far than a generic BBC quarry.
When it comes to Maloney, it's fair to say he isn't a Graeme Harper as Genesis is not hugely innovative when it comes to his directing. What it is is sharp, focused, expertly woven and excellent at creating the desired atmosphere throughout the story. I'll give some examples:
- The opening shot of the soldiers coming over the mount is expertly crafted and sets the story's early tone exceptionally well.
- The final scene of Part One is one of the greatest moments in the show's history. It's shot perfectly - the initial shot of Davros tells us everything we need to know about him in the first few seconds. The initial shot of the Dalek sitting there and then hovering into place drives home what an important moment Sarah (and by extension the audience) is witnessing: Here it is: the first Dalek, ready to kill. And that's precisely what it does - well, it kills some cardboard soldiers actually, but the point still stands.
- The freeze frame ending of Part Two is genius and yes I don't care that the resolution is a massive fucking cheat It's an awesome cliffhanger
- Maloney never shoots the Daleks as a particularly formidable force on their own until the end. There's always the feeling in the way they're portrayed that they are peripheral to their own story right up until they're abruptly anything but. This mirrors the way the script handles this perfectly.
- The scene where Nyder betrays Gharman in the corridor is expertly tense, as is the interrogation scene that finishes Part Four
- The best directed scene in the story, however, is the 'Virus' conversation between the Doctor and Davros. Just watch it and you'll know what I mean.
Of course, the story is not perfect visually because it was made in 1975 and the current year is 2020. But for what it is, it is excellent and perfectly complements the script. Speaking of which...
For a start, the production design is mostly excellent - yes, it's a bit seventies naff, but I'm willing to excuse it on the grounds that (and this might be a bit of a stretch) it was made in the seventies. The sets of the Kaled and Thal bases have the look of a war torn but methodical society, and the clean, angular lines have more than a subtle hint of the Nazi influence. The location work at the beginning is mostly solid, with credit definitely being due to the production team for making it feel like far than a generic BBC quarry.
When it comes to Maloney, it's fair to say he isn't a Graeme Harper as Genesis is not hugely innovative when it comes to his directing. What it is is sharp, focused, expertly woven and excellent at creating the desired atmosphere throughout the story. I'll give some examples:
- The opening shot of the soldiers coming over the mount is expertly crafted and sets the story's early tone exceptionally well.
- The final scene of Part One is one of the greatest moments in the show's history. It's shot perfectly - the initial shot of Davros tells us everything we need to know about him in the first few seconds. The initial shot of the Dalek sitting there and then hovering into place drives home what an important moment Sarah (and by extension the audience) is witnessing: Here it is: the first Dalek, ready to kill. And that's precisely what it does - well, it kills some cardboard soldiers actually, but the point still stands.
- The freeze frame ending of Part Two is genius and yes I don't care that the resolution is a massive fucking cheat It's an awesome cliffhanger
- Maloney never shoots the Daleks as a particularly formidable force on their own until the end. There's always the feeling in the way they're portrayed that they are peripheral to their own story right up until they're abruptly anything but. This mirrors the way the script handles this perfectly.
- The scene where Nyder betrays Gharman in the corridor is expertly tense, as is the interrogation scene that finishes Part Four
- The best directed scene in the story, however, is the 'Virus' conversation between the Doctor and Davros. Just watch it and you'll know what I mean.
Of course, the story is not perfect visually because it was made in 1975 and the current year is 2020. But for what it is, it is excellent and perfectly complements the script. Speaking of which...
 |
| ALLEGORY |
Thematically
It's incredible that the same man who farted out Death to the Daleks the year before suddenly became able to create a thematic masterpiece on this scale. And yet here we are.
First of all, we'll look at the blatantly obvious which is the whole Nazi allegory that has defined the Daleks from the beginning (and has been forgotten since this story came out for a variety of reasons I can't be bothered to go into here. Mostly that RTD and Moffat are hacks.). In The Daleks, they were portrayed as xenophobic and obsessed with purity but their very alien nature meant that the finer details of the allegory couldn't quite come across. Which is fine, because that wasn't all there was to them. But coming to their creation, Nation decided to put that allegory into the very fibre of their being. Nazism wasn't just a feature of the Daleks - Nazism created the Daleks. They were born out of a society that, while not a perfect mirror image of the Third Reich, is clearly closely modelled on it. Nation's greatest success in creating the theme around this creation story is allowing the viewer to understand why the Daleks came about, and looking at the Kaleds and the scientists and at Davros its pretty bloody clear. Their obsession with purity and destruction leads this society inevitably into their final pepperpot-shaped form, just like it led the Nazis themselves to genocide and destruction.
Nation's trick, however, and why this transitions from a good analogy to an incredible story, is to perfectly transcend the line between subtle and blatant. Make it too subtle and nobody notices; make it too blatant and you get every time NuWho tries to be political. What this story does, however, is to make it so that its pretty obvious what they are meant to be, but not to the point that it takes over - the imagery and themes clearly point the audience in that direction with the overtones from the Kaleds and Thals of racial purity, the obviously-Nazi like military society in which they live, etc. But it's never spelled out, there's no comment from the Doctor about how this is all 'reminds him of something', nothing that RTD, Moffat or Chibnall-era Who would pull out to make it exceptionally concious rather than subconcious.
This theme also extends to the wider story and the characters - yes I know I'm going to talk about the characters separately but I'm going to have loads to say there and this fits naturally here so sod off. For a start, Nation makes it clear that the Thals are no different than the Kaleds when it comes to their purity obsession. This is a necessary change of course - the pacifistic hippies from The Daleks wouldn't have fit with the story at all - but Nation uses it to enhance the perception of this war and the effect it has had on the societies. The Thals are just as obsessed with racial purity and happily commit genocide to end the war, essentially taking the theme of the fucked-up morality that created the Daleks and extending it across the battlefield. These societies were doomed and the Daleks were just a symptom of that. Now, to be fair, Nation does allow some nuance here. Take Bettan for instance - there's no doubt she's a patriot but she also doesn't seem to be a fanatic and she has no qualms about working with the Mutos, who are the object of racial hatred from both races. She's there to be an ally for the Doctor of course (if plot convenience characters were a vice then no Who story would be any good) and also to be token-woman (as the only woman in the story other than Sarah... nobody said the seventies had it all) but does also play a thematic role as an example that perhaps not all people are like the societies they come from.
But we only have to look back at the Kaleds to see that this can only go so far. General Ravon in Part One is a lunatic raving about exterminating the Thals but by the time he reappears in Part Three, we've seen Davros and his like, and well, Ravon seems positively nice and reasonable because he only wants to exterminate a race of people rather than do that while also mutating his own race into insane jellyfish inside a tank. It's used to bring about a revelation for the viewer - Ravon's rant in Part One was normal. On this world, Davros is still an insane megalomaniac, but that doesn't mean that lesser forms of evil aren't recognised as such. It also brings up an interesting idea for the viewer - all these secondary characters like Gharman and Ronson are presented as sympathetic, but what views do they hold? Are they really any different from Ravon? Are they even more deep hatred in their views than him? Gharman is against the creation of the Daleks, the corruption of the science elite's work and a dictatorship by Davros, but we hear nothing about the Thals or the Mutos and what he thinks about them. Sure, he and the others are allies for the Doctor against Davros but in many other stories (i.e most of the Seventh Doctor's last two seasons) they may well be villains. Nation creates the idea of the world that the Daleks were born out of, perhaps even inevitable to be born out of - a world where even the good guys might be nutters,
Nation's trick, however, and why this transitions from a good analogy to an incredible story, is to perfectly transcend the line between subtle and blatant. Make it too subtle and nobody notices; make it too blatant and you get every time NuWho tries to be political. What this story does, however, is to make it so that its pretty obvious what they are meant to be, but not to the point that it takes over - the imagery and themes clearly point the audience in that direction with the overtones from the Kaleds and Thals of racial purity, the obviously-Nazi like military society in which they live, etc. But it's never spelled out, there's no comment from the Doctor about how this is all 'reminds him of something', nothing that RTD, Moffat or Chibnall-era Who would pull out to make it exceptionally concious rather than subconcious.
 |
| Sarah was beginning to wonder when The A-Z of Classic Who would get to the point |
But we only have to look back at the Kaleds to see that this can only go so far. General Ravon in Part One is a lunatic raving about exterminating the Thals but by the time he reappears in Part Three, we've seen Davros and his like, and well, Ravon seems positively nice and reasonable because he only wants to exterminate a race of people rather than do that while also mutating his own race into insane jellyfish inside a tank. It's used to bring about a revelation for the viewer - Ravon's rant in Part One was normal. On this world, Davros is still an insane megalomaniac, but that doesn't mean that lesser forms of evil aren't recognised as such. It also brings up an interesting idea for the viewer - all these secondary characters like Gharman and Ronson are presented as sympathetic, but what views do they hold? Are they really any different from Ravon? Are they even more deep hatred in their views than him? Gharman is against the creation of the Daleks, the corruption of the science elite's work and a dictatorship by Davros, but we hear nothing about the Thals or the Mutos and what he thinks about them. Sure, he and the others are allies for the Doctor against Davros but in many other stories (i.e most of the Seventh Doctor's last two seasons) they may well be villains. Nation creates the idea of the world that the Daleks were born out of, perhaps even inevitable to be born out of - a world where even the good guys might be nutters,
 |
| I need to break a long wall of text but can't think of a funny caption - if you think of one please let me know |
That is not the only place that Genesis shines thematically. As the Daleks themselves were partially born out of Nation's experience of the Second World War, the story of their genesis is intrinsically woven in with the overall theme of war. In fact, one of the most obvious areas this is evident is at the beginning of the story - the happy walk the Doctor, Sarah and Harry take through the wasteland isn't just one of the space filling walls that lesser stories use exceptionally prominently (Exhibit A: most of the Sixth Doctor's era use these very liberally). It's in fact crafted as a 'show not tell' tour through the Thousand Year War - a brutal scarred landscape, littered with mines and bodies, while also showing the 'war of attrition, only backwards' - it sets up Nation's idea of what war is like expertly - devastating, brutal, pointless. It also uses the extra length of a six-parter to good effect in a move so rare it's frankly astonishing that I'm bringing it up.
Nation's experience of war was always key to the Daleks, drawing from both WW2 and the Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation. The scenes mentioned above, as well as the people and societies portrayed in the story, show this perfectly. After all, Ravon is a military man and his anti-Thal rant is borne out of having been at war with them his entire life. War has perverted these societies, into those willing to commit genocide and mutate themselves into monsters in order to win. From Davros' perspective, it makes perfect sense to remove empathy and pity from the Daleks - what good is that in a war? And he's also a nut, but that's neither here nor there.
As mentioned way back at the start, much of the story's strong points regarding the characters and story are probably down to script editor Robert Holmes in one way or another. To what extent its impossible to know, especially when considering that both men died a long time ago, but I can say with certainty that all I've talked about in this section was Nation's work. It was all vital to the creation of the Daleks 12 years before this story hit the screens, and its just as vital to making this story into a masterful look at the ideas of racial purity and war that gave birth to the Daleks both off screen in 1963 and on screen in this story.
As mentioned way back at the start, much of the story's strong points regarding the characters and story are probably down to script editor Robert Holmes in one way or another. To what extent its impossible to know, especially when considering that both men died a long time ago, but I can say with certainty that all I've talked about in this section was Nation's work. It was all vital to the creation of the Daleks 12 years before this story hit the screens, and its just as vital to making this story into a masterful look at the ideas of racial purity and war that gave birth to the Daleks both off screen in 1963 and on screen in this story.
Also, in another important theme of the story, many reused Drahvin props from Galaxy 4 can be spotted throughout the story clearly showing the thematic link between the Dalek condition and the gender politics of Galaxy 4 and how it affects the overall idea of how women are portrayed in war and fiction including pepperpot-shaped cyborgs.
Alright, maybe not that last one.
Characterally
I'm sure there's a better word for that but I can't be bothered to find it. Sue me.
Anyway, there are five characters I want to look at in detail in four separate sections: The Doctor, Sarah & Harry, Davros and Nyder.
It's sometimes easy to forget how early on in the Fourth Doctor's run Genesis of the Daleks actually is. It's only his fourth story - that's a bit like if 'Bohemian Rhapsody' 'We Will Rock You' 'Don't Stop Me Now' and 'Another One Bites the Dust' were all on 'Queen II'. If you know nothing about Queen, that's a bit like if some of the most important of the Fourth Doctor's defining moments took place in Genesis of the Daleks. I hope that clears things up.
Characterally
I'm sure there's a better word for that but I can't be bothered to find it. Sue me.
Anyway, there are five characters I want to look at in detail in four separate sections: The Doctor, Sarah & Harry, Davros and Nyder.
It's sometimes easy to forget how early on in the Fourth Doctor's run Genesis of the Daleks actually is. It's only his fourth story - that's a bit like if 'Bohemian Rhapsody' 'We Will Rock You' 'Don't Stop Me Now' and 'Another One Bites the Dust' were all on 'Queen II'. If you know nothing about Queen, that's a bit like if some of the most important of the Fourth Doctor's defining moments took place in Genesis of the Daleks. I hope that clears things up.
 |
| "Just touch these two wires together, and The A-Z of Classic Who's crap analogies are finished forever" |
This Doctor has had barely any time to grow - he had some strong moments in The Ark in Space but that was about it really, and Nation/Holmes seemingly leapt at this opportunity to use the genesis of his most famous foes to add onto this Doctor's character. So let's take it piece by piece.
At the beginning of the story, the Doctor takes being pulled out of time by the Time Lords as you might expect - not very well. He seems almost petulant at first, something that this Doctor demonstrated in his first few stories quite a few times, but as soon as the Time Lord (note: actually (major spoilers for the Gallifrey audio series ahead) Chancellor Valyes from a much later Gallifrey than the one this Doctor is from, sent by Coordinator Narvin to destroy or weaken the Daleks so they couldn't develop the technology to trap Romana in the Matrix. True story!) mentions the word 'Dalek', the petulance disappears. He suddenly takes it very seriously, and begrudgingly agrees because he recognises how important the mission really is.
This scene alone essentially establishes the primary characteristic of the Fourth Doctor - on the surface he's a light-hearted joker, prone to acting 'childish' (as he says himself in Robot), but as soon as the stakes are high, it all becomes evident its a front and he very much takes it seriously.
I think it is likely this is mostly Robert Holmes, as the only time we saw this from the Doctor prior to Genesis was in The Ark in Space, which was written by Homes. However, it is here where this characteristic is truly established. The Doctor jokes throughout the story when he feels the situation is not serious - such as in Part One when Ravon is ranting at him; he has clearly clocked fairly quickly that Ravon is a jumped-up grunt and doesn't pose much actual danger to himself or Harry. But you'll notice that he never makes any wisecracks in the company of Davros, as in that instance, he knows this is to be taken seriously.
 |
| "So who are you anyway?" "Depends whether Big Finish is canon or not" |
This scene alone essentially establishes the primary characteristic of the Fourth Doctor - on the surface he's a light-hearted joker, prone to acting 'childish' (as he says himself in Robot), but as soon as the stakes are high, it all becomes evident its a front and he very much takes it seriously.
I think it is likely this is mostly Robert Holmes, as the only time we saw this from the Doctor prior to Genesis was in The Ark in Space, which was written by Homes. However, it is here where this characteristic is truly established. The Doctor jokes throughout the story when he feels the situation is not serious - such as in Part One when Ravon is ranting at him; he has clearly clocked fairly quickly that Ravon is a jumped-up grunt and doesn't pose much actual danger to himself or Harry. But you'll notice that he never makes any wisecracks in the company of Davros, as in that instance, he knows this is to be taken seriously.
 |
| "Pull my finger Davros" |
It's also important to note that this Doctor is not doing the Tenth Doctor thing of using (usually bad) humour to thinly cover his own massive insecurities. This Doctor takes pride in his sense of humour and ability to act childish, but he also can handle situations with authority. In Genesis, we do feel his desperation at certain points, such as getting back the time ring or confronting Davros in the 'power to end all life' scene, but mostly he stays guarded, resolute and determined.
Of course, we have been ignoring the giant elephant in the room that is this story's most famous scene and perhaps Doctor Who's finest individual moment. The Doctor stands, with the ability to destroy the Daleks forever, and asks himself, truly and honestly, whether he has the right to do so. I'm going to wear my badge of 'Basic Bitch' proudly here, but this scene deserves every accolade it has ever received. Not only does it ask a moral question that is to be pondered by the audience just as much to Sarah and Harry, (whether it is right to kill and destroy for a greater good), it also shows the Doctor struggling to come up with an answer to said question. It is also important to understand the Fourth Doctor is doing this - there are plenty of other Doctors (First, Seventh, Ninth, Twelfth) who would have touched those wires together without a second thought and called it a day. But the Fourth Doctor can't bring himself to do it, which establishes his personal moral code, one that he follows almost entirely (Scorby from The Seeds of Doom probably disagrees) throughout his era. And yet, it is made clear that he is not comfortable or happy in his indecision; there is no moral back-patting like you get in bad episodes of Star Trek. He is faced with two bad decisions and can't morally accept either. It's also why the scene ending with Gharman coming along to tell him that there may be a third way isn't a cop out - the Doctor frankly says to Gharman that he can't tell him how glad he is to hear that. And indeed, once the Doctor sees Gharman and the others slaughtered by the Daleks, that's when he finally makes the decision. That's when he realises that damn his conscience and damn the consequences, the Daleks have to go. And tragically, he realises that too late.
In the discussion around this scene, we should also consider the final proclamation that from the Daleks must also come something good. Is this a genuine proclamation from the Doctor that although not everything turned out as it should, the Doctor's mission was not in vain, and even if it was, his earlier idea that fear and hatred of the Daleks would bring people together was not a falsehood? Or was it the Doctor justifying to himself and his companions something he knew he failed - after all, he only managed to delay the Daleks by 100 years - barely anything in galactic terms and indeed did nothing to stop the coming war. I think the former was intended, but the latter is certainly possible to interpret.
Genesis solidifies the characterisation of the Fourth Doctor - something that would of course be ignored by many lesser writers as his era went on - and does it in a way that gives this story a solid moral and philosophical foundation that provides much of why it works so well.
 |
| Of course, there were certain people who were not so glad the Doctor hadn't put the wires together |
So anyway, moving on to Sarah and Harry. Sarah-Jane Smith is of course one of the most beloved companions of all time, while Harry Sullivan is a likeable character played by the infinitely likeable Ian Marter, but they also play an important character role in the story.
The role of the companion in Doctor Who is to provide a foil for the audience - someone who the Doctor can explain things to for the audience and someone they can relate to their experience of the Doctor's adventures. Genesis is no different in that regard, but it does differ in that Sarah and Harry are also the Doctor's moral foil.
There's a reason why Sarah doesn't hesitate in trying to get the Doctor to put the wires together - all she sees is the need to end the evil of the Daleks. Her comparison between the Daleks and a deadly virus (deliberately echoing the Doctor's earlier conversation with Davros) is deliberate - she sees nothing more than a mindless evil that needs to be wiped out. And it's all because she's a good person with a strong sense of right and wrong - note how earlier in the story she leads the slave revolt against the Thals because of that - but she lacks the Doctor's finer moral point of view. Or is that the case? I think it's clear that neither of them are intended by Nation (or Holmes) to necessarily be in the right - its left up to the viewer to decide and the true outcome of the mission (a success or a failure?) is equally left deliberately vague in order for the audience to decide whether the Doctor or Sarah was the one in the right.
Harry provides a foil of a very different kind, mostly in the early parts of the story. Firstly, the 'landmine' scene early in Part One is a major character moment for him - the Doctor steps on a mine, and Harry, resolutely and without a second thought, risks his life to make sure that it doesn't detonate. It's a simple character moment but one that establishes he's brave and with a clear sense of his duty to save lives - he is a doctor after all. His main purpose in this early part of the story, however, is that he is far less experienced at time travel than Sarah and has never met the Daleks before, unlike her. It's no coincidence therefore, that they are separated, and he remains with the Doctor to learn of their early origins along him; thus taking in his responses on a moral and philosophical basis. Meanwhile, Sarah, who knows what the Daleks can do (theoretically anyway; she did after all meet them in Death to the Daleks where they got clobbered by a bunch of glorified Egyptian mummies) already has her view of the Daleks solidified - she doesn't need to see them born as Harry does. It's therefore important to note his silence at the point of the big moral decision - he is essentially the viewer, unsure of which side to take and unsure of which decision is the right one.
Sarah and Harry therefore play a vital narrative role, but they are dwarfed by easily the most important character in the whole story; the man who orchestrated the Genesis of the Daleks.
There's a reason why Sarah doesn't hesitate in trying to get the Doctor to put the wires together - all she sees is the need to end the evil of the Daleks. Her comparison between the Daleks and a deadly virus (deliberately echoing the Doctor's earlier conversation with Davros) is deliberate - she sees nothing more than a mindless evil that needs to be wiped out. And it's all because she's a good person with a strong sense of right and wrong - note how earlier in the story she leads the slave revolt against the Thals because of that - but she lacks the Doctor's finer moral point of view. Or is that the case? I think it's clear that neither of them are intended by Nation (or Holmes) to necessarily be in the right - its left up to the viewer to decide and the true outcome of the mission (a success or a failure?) is equally left deliberately vague in order for the audience to decide whether the Doctor or Sarah was the one in the right.
Harry provides a foil of a very different kind, mostly in the early parts of the story. Firstly, the 'landmine' scene early in Part One is a major character moment for him - the Doctor steps on a mine, and Harry, resolutely and without a second thought, risks his life to make sure that it doesn't detonate. It's a simple character moment but one that establishes he's brave and with a clear sense of his duty to save lives - he is a doctor after all. His main purpose in this early part of the story, however, is that he is far less experienced at time travel than Sarah and has never met the Daleks before, unlike her. It's no coincidence therefore, that they are separated, and he remains with the Doctor to learn of their early origins along him; thus taking in his responses on a moral and philosophical basis. Meanwhile, Sarah, who knows what the Daleks can do (theoretically anyway; she did after all meet them in Death to the Daleks where they got clobbered by a bunch of glorified Egyptian mummies) already has her view of the Daleks solidified - she doesn't need to see them born as Harry does. It's therefore important to note his silence at the point of the big moral decision - he is essentially the viewer, unsure of which side to take and unsure of which decision is the right one.
Sarah and Harry therefore play a vital narrative role, but they are dwarfed by easily the most important character in the whole story; the man who orchestrated the Genesis of the Daleks.
 |
| wassup |
It's easy, in light of the character's later overuse to mostly average effect, to forget quite how unique of a concept Davros is when compared to earlier Dalek stories. Looking at their first story, the idea of a single creator, a man who, while disfigured, could easily have been human, is certainly not a logical end-point. Yet, Nation takes that idea and uses it to mix in with the story's overall themes - a man, so blinded by hatred and a desperate need for survival, with enough power, could easily do something like this, with not only links it back to the Nazi allegory, but also to that of the desperation of war.
Firstly though, it's important to note how much of a nothing this character would have been without the incredible performance from Michael Wisher, who masterfully portrays Davros as both a calm, reasonable scientist before making it very obvious that was all a charade and descending into racing madness, while also never breaking from utter self-confidence until his life is in danger - when the Doctor threatens him, and then right up at the end when panic and desperation take over. Hubris meets nemesis - a nemesis he created with his own hands. It's a stark contrast to later Davros actors - David Goodison actually did well with the subtle bits but failed to really get across how insane Davros really is; Terry Molloy was an excellent mad Davros but always sounded a bit insane even when trying to be normal, although to be fair he had a decent number of good subtle scenes as well, while Julian Bleach once again played a very good subtle Davros but went way too over the top with lunatic Davros. Wisher has been the only actor who has mastered the parts subtleties and without his performance the character would be nothing like as effective.
Davros in this story is an enigma, one even the Doctor seemingly doesn't understand. His is ruthless and power-mad, his ambition for survival is borne out of repulsive racial and genetic beliefs, he engineers the death of almost his entire species to further his own twisted cause and then coldly murders dozens of people because they would not subscribe to a future as a xenophobic lunatic squid locked in a metal pepperpot. But despite all that, there's more to him than being a straight up villain. The moments were he feigns reasonableness and lucidity would not be nearly as convincing, and thus the murder of the Kaleds by the Daleks nearly as shocking, if this were not the case.
The 'power to end all life' scene shows perfectly how this all comes together. Davros has just viciously tortured the Doctor's friends for information that will make the Daleks supreme across time and space - yet he is happy to sit down and talk to the Doctor, as men of science, in a reasonable way. When the Doctor poses to him that the Daleks are evil, he sounds almost offended at the idea - the Daleks are simply built to survive, and he seems it as perfectly logically and reasonable that to do that they must crush all other races and become the dominant species. But it brings the idea forward - Davros is doing a terrible thing because of awful reasons, but perhaps he really thinks he is doing good. He thinks he is working for peace, the end of war - certainly fits Nation's themes of war making people do terrible things, doesn't it? It gives the impression that Davros is far from all he seems, and we have seen this throughout the story - for every moment of raving lunacy, there is one of calm lucidity. Case in point - as soon as the Doctor poses the idea of the all-destructive virus, Davros lets down the facade. He might be conning himself into thinking he's working for survival and peace, but really its all about power. The power of destruction is the most powerful of all - and he wants it, and he knows the Daleks is how he'll get it. I think that means, therefore, that he is conning himself into thinking that he's really working for peace and survival, which betrays, beneath his scarred form and the raving lunacy of the creator of the Daleks, a human fallibility. He, like anyone doing a terrible thing, wants to reason himself that he is doing the right thing - a contrast with the Doctor, who refused to reason himself into committing genocide.
The 'power to end all life' scene shows perfectly how this all comes together. Davros has just viciously tortured the Doctor's friends for information that will make the Daleks supreme across time and space - yet he is happy to sit down and talk to the Doctor, as men of science, in a reasonable way. When the Doctor poses to him that the Daleks are evil, he sounds almost offended at the idea - the Daleks are simply built to survive, and he seems it as perfectly logically and reasonable that to do that they must crush all other races and become the dominant species. But it brings the idea forward - Davros is doing a terrible thing because of awful reasons, but perhaps he really thinks he is doing good. He thinks he is working for peace, the end of war - certainly fits Nation's themes of war making people do terrible things, doesn't it? It gives the impression that Davros is far from all he seems, and we have seen this throughout the story - for every moment of raving lunacy, there is one of calm lucidity. Case in point - as soon as the Doctor poses the idea of the all-destructive virus, Davros lets down the facade. He might be conning himself into thinking he's working for survival and peace, but really its all about power. The power of destruction is the most powerful of all - and he wants it, and he knows the Daleks is how he'll get it. I think that means, therefore, that he is conning himself into thinking that he's really working for peace and survival, which betrays, beneath his scarred form and the raving lunacy of the creator of the Daleks, a human fallibility. He, like anyone doing a terrible thing, wants to reason himself that he is doing the right thing - a contrast with the Doctor, who refused to reason himself into committing genocide.
While Davros' motivation for creating the Daleks is therefore shrouded under the idea of war and racial superiority, its really about one simple thing - power. He even comes out and says it at one point - achievement through absolute power. Davros already has power over his own kind, but why stop there? Why not the whole universe? And the Daleks are the way he can do that. It's also what makes his demise as perfect as it is - he created a being with ultimate power and the ultimate sense of superiority because of that power, but never, for a moment, thought that meant that he was giving the power to someone other than himself. Once the Daleks turned on him, he was powerless. The Daleks have no need for Davros once they are created and without that need, they have no reason for him to excercise power over them - thus their response is perfectly logical and in keeping with their programming for survival. Davros being hoist by his own petard is such a perfect end for the character, and it is difficult to not conclude that his subsequent reappearances cheapen this ending somewhat. But that can't be used against this story, which ends the story of its most important character in a way that is both surprising for the viewer yet makes perfect sense.
Of course, this is also an excellent scene because of how the Daleks have been peripheral to their own story up until this moment. They've obeyed orders, fetched and carried for Davros, but they haven't done much on their own accord - its therefore a shock for the audience when they do finally do something pretty dramatic of their own accord. It works even better than this suggests because it shouldn't be a shock - the Daleks, not taking orders and establishing themselves as the superior beings? That's a surprise, said nobody ever.
That is all I have to say about Davros in this story, but who knows, maybe I'll be gifted with the ability to write flawlessly about him in his next appearance here. It is an interesting conjecture, the only Doctor Who writer, reigning supreme. Yes, yes. To have on my keyboard such power, to know that what sad nerds read online was my choice, to know the tiny pressure on my mouse, enough to press 'publish' would end everything. Yes, I would do it! That power would set me up above the gods! AND THROUGH THE A-Z OF CLASSIC WHO, I SHALL HAVE THAT POWER!
Errr, sorry, I'm not quite sure what came over me. Anyway, moving on.
 |
| Nyder was enjoying this staring contest |
The final character we need to look at here is Nyder. Like Davros, Nyder would be nothing without the strength of the performance, and Peter Miles is utterly sublime. The performance is authoritative yet creepy, full of anger and passion yet utterly calm and collected. Without Miles, much of what I will discuss in a moment would not be nearly as apparent and Nyder would just be another background character instead of a vital foil to Davros and a crucial part of the overall story.
Nyder is Davros' loyal henchman - utterly loyal in every way, but this is never made completely apparent. Otherwise his betrayal of Gharman during the story would not be believable at all, and it completely is. While we've been given no reason to think Nyder would betray Davros, up to that point in the story, he's been no different than most of the other Kaleds. A xenophobic nut sure, but when he goes opposite Ravon in Part One, Nyder only seems different in that he is far more authoritative and confident compared to the out-of-his-depth general.Only when he does betray Gharman does his loyalty become totally clear - he not only approves of the Dalek project, he approves of it enough to betray a colleague who happens to be opposing it. He's far from a yes-man of course; he challenges Davros on his seeming surrender later on in the story, seemingly aghast that the man he serves so totally would feebly give up. Yet Nyder is also more complex - in his questioning of Davros at this instance, he betrays a more military-like mind than his boss and an inability to see subtleties, which certainly makes him not much more than useful henchman for Davros. We also see later on, when the Doctor threatens him to give him the tape of the Dalek defeats, Nyder gives in fairly easily, indicating he's more than happy to disobey Davros if it saves his own skin. That fact makes his eventual demise even more interesting - he doesn't think there's any danger in simply obeying Davros and turning off the production line, but a Dalek very swiftly dissuades him of that notion.
 |
| ow that hurts |
Nyder is a representation of those who are brought in by ideas like Nazism. He's certainly intelligent in his own right, but he has been bought by simple ideas and a strongman figure, and lacks the subtleties of the mind to know both how he is being had and to know when he is being outsmarted. He also enjoys and is very good at exerting the power granted to him by said strongman over others and his loyalty is kept by both this power and an utter belief in the righteousness of the strongman. It is a chilling reminder that the Third Reich had plenty of Nyders.
A Conclusion
Genesis of the Daleks excels because of all I have discussed above - but it works because in addition to all those things, it is also well-paced, tense, thrilling, provocative and just generally entertaining. Sure its not perfect - the rubber clam is a rare mistep - but not only does it provide a thematic and character masterpiece, it can also be enjoyed on the surface level of being a cracking Doctor Who adventure. The Doctor has to make a major moral decision, yes - but he also has to fight the Daleks, rescue his friends and use his ingenuity to save the day, just like any other good story. That is what puts this story over the top into my pick for the greatest piece of Who media ever made - you can think about it but you can also enjoy it. What better combination can there be.
Final Score: 10/10. A Doctor Who tour de force, Genesis is a story that is a thoroughly entertaining watch, a sublimely-made story, has exceptional characters and a strong moral and thematic base which brings it together as one of, nay, the finest moment in Doctor Who's history and a benchmark few have even come close to achieving since.
Next Episode: Ghost Light
Comments
Post a Comment