Articles

You are currently browsing the archive for the Articles category.

Sid James, Tony Hancock, Bill Kerr and Kenneth Williams
This article was published in its original form in Circus #1. As well as revising the arse out of it, I’ve taken the opportunity to add a number of fancy sound clips. I hope you enjoy it!
 

Interviewer John Freeman, in his famous 1960 Face to Face interrogation, wasn’t the first to assume a certain comic genius’s true name was Anthony Aloysius St John Hancock. By then the real Anthony John, with all his flaws and eccentricities, had become inextricably ingrained in his fictional persona, as much as he tried to distance himself from it. He told Freeman: “It isn’t a character I play, that I put on and off like a coat. It is greatly a part of me and a part of everybody else that I see.”

Before the first radio Hancock’s Half Hour, on November 2nd 1954, Tony Hancock had become quite a regular on TV and radio, most notably as the tutor of ventriloquist’s dummy Archie Andrews in the last 26 episodes of Educating Archie, a radio comedy by Eric Sykes and Sid Colin. He was also well known from his stage appearances, in successful variety shows such as London Laughs and Talk of the Town, and in panto (which he despised). Inspired initially by the likes of Max Miller and Sid Field, he slowly developed his own distinctive style which, coupled with perfect timing and a degree of audience control and manipulation that was important to live performers, guaranteed that his audience laughed in all the right places. But, no matter how perfect the medium was for him, Hancock disliked working on the stage. He was terrified of it and was often physically sick before going on.

Ray Galton and Alan Simpson writing partnership had been forged as teenagers, when they had found themselves in the same TB sanatorium for several years. “We had a lot of time on our hands, making handbags, listening to the radio,” and so they began writing comedy for hospital radio. Their work progressed until, in 1951, their material was used by Hancock for the first time. They were perfect for each other, and became his regular writers. In 1954 Hancock, Galton and Simpson were given a radio show to themselves, and on November 2nd Wally Stott kicked off ‘The First Night Party’ with the dopiest theme music ever written.

Over the course of three years and countless sketches and shows the rich Hancock ‘character’ was developing. Of this fictional Hancock, Ray Galton said: “It was really seedy grandeur. Everyone could see he was pretentious and seedy, except himself of course, and that was really the basis of his character.” Many of Hancock’s own traits were brought into the character, such as his own lack of success with women, a rather mean streak, and his desire to be an intellectual and philosopher in ‘Bertie’ Russell mould, constantly striving for fundamental truths. It was because of Hancock’s honesty about himself that he allowed Galton and Simpson to derive humour from his true character, and the three of them were fortunate in that they shared similar attitudes and senses of humour. The character was very complex and, for all his irritating quirks, still utterly endearing and real.

Radio comedian and ‘resting’ thespian Anthony Aloysius St John Hancock (the Second) believes himself to be basically perfect in most respects, but discovers the hard way that he falls far short in all of them. In his own eyes, he is a good-looking devil (“What I don’t know about women could be written on a pinhead with pneumatic drill”), vastly erudite (“Ah, that’s the Great Bear up there… It’s mythology; and the Mythologians were the greatest navigators in the world. Do you realise they were in America long before Columbus? And they only had little ships, too!”)… in fact far too good to be living with simpletons in East Cheam, the tatty and disreputable end of the borough, in a ramshackle old semi-detached (“Even the foundations are shifting… You look in the deeds. 23 Railway Cuttings, Cheam, yeah? Forty years ago it was number 11!”).

To quote from Roger Wilmut’s excellent book Tony Hancock – ‘Artiste’, our hero is “a failed Shakespearean actor with pretensions to a knighthood and no bookings; age late 30s but claims to be younger; success with women nil; a pretentious, gullible, bombastic, occasionally kindly, superstitious, avaricious, petulant, over-imaginative, semi-educated, gourmandising, incompetent, cunning, obstinate, self-opinionated, impolite, pompous, lecherous, lonely and likeable fall-guy.”

‘Agricultural ‘Ancock’ showcases some of Hancock’s rather bizarre ideas, this time about life in the country, that big town without any buildings in. “I still haven’t forgotten that trip into the country last year when we came across those ducks in the pond,” recalls Hancock’s secretary, Miss Pugh. “What was that brilliant remark you made? ‘They must have whopping long legs to walk across that!’” To keep the rent down on Number 23, Hancock needs to prove he’s an agricultural labourer by buying a farm:

HANCOCK: “Anybody can make a go of farming. A little planning, that’s all. Rotate your crops. Rotate ‘em. Get ‘em going round, that’s the secret. I shall start off with, let’s see, I shall plant two fields of pigs and a couple of acres of chickens.
MISS PUGH: “You’re going to plant some chickens?”
HANCOCK: “Certainly. How do you expect them to grow? Get ‘em buried up to their necks, wait for a bit of rain, we should have a nice crop of eggs… They’re exactly the same as rabbits. I saw two rabbits dig a hole in the ground, disappear, and when they came up there was hundreds of ‘em. If rabbits can do it, so can pigs and chickens.”

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Things don’t go according to plan of course, as Hancock unwittingly buys, and starts farming, the Lords Cricket Ground from his ‘friend’ Sidney James.

hancock2.jpg

Unfortunately for Hancock, Galton and Simpson populated his life with various foils and pestilences. Chief among them was Sid James, the small-time crook and archetypal loveable rogue. Sid constantly preys on Hancock’s utter gullibility, with schemes that usually leave the latter out of pocket. In ‘A House on the Cliff’, Sid convinces Hancock he needs to build three houses, one at the top of a cliff, one on the beach below – with two escalators to take them in-between – and another house two miles inland, connected by a railway (the one at the bottom of the cliff to live in during the day; the one at the top for when the tide comes in at 8pm; the escalators – one up, one down – to carry him and his furniture; the one inland to live in if the weather gets rough and the cliff collapses, with access by train courtesy of the Sidney James Engineering Company – “He’s dead right,” says Hancock, “I’m surrounded by idiots!”). In ‘The Insurance Policy’, so he can “lay about with impunity”, Hancock takes out cover with the Sidney James Friendly Accidents Society, from being struck by lightning, run over by steam-rollers, run down by stampeding cattle, falling down lift shafts, assassination, sunstroke, earthquakes, frost and snakebites (with an income of £10 a week, and taking into account he used to drink, smoke and can’t afford to feed himself any more, Hancock’s premium turns out to be £13 14s 6d. Result: misery). In ‘The Income Tax Demand’, chartered accountant Sid helpfully fabricates a series of expense sheets and ‘mystery investments’ that increase Hancock’s tax bill from £14 12s 3d to over £170 000 (“I’ve got another set of books here proving I never saw this bloke before in my life!” says Sid in court, when things start getting serious). It was probably Sidney Balmoral James who sold Laurel and Hardy the Brooklyn Bridge.

HANCOCK: “The man’s a scurrilous scalliwag.”
BILL: “Well, you said it.”
HANCOCK: “Only just.”
(‘The New Car’)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Sid James was as impeccable as ever in Hancock’s Half Hour.

And then there was Australian vagabond, Bill Kerr, he of the blink-and-miss-it appearance in The Dambusters (as Hancock delightedly points out) and later, Doctor Who‘s ‘The Enemy of the World’. Rather like Baldrick in The Black Adder, Bill’s character began life as a fast-talking intelligent type in the first two series, a voice of sanity between Sid’s schemes and Hancock’s gullibility. The problem was that that voice was already being supplied by the current female character, so by the third series Bill had evolved into the endearing idiot.

William Montbeaurency Beaumont “Billabong” Kerr, like Hancock, is a lazy unemployed actor (most of the time – these things changed weekly to suit the storyline). Born in Wagga Wagga, he shares Number 23 with “Tub” Hancock, who’s regretted it ever since. The character has a delightful air of childlike innocence and although he rarely contributes much to the storyline, usually has some of the most hilarious, nonsensical lines and exchanges:

HANCOCK: “If you’re going to learn how to read and write you’ve got to start right at the very beginning. There is no short cut to literacy… ”
BILL: “… Where’s that?”
HANCOCK: “Where’s what?”
BILL: “Literacy?”
HANCOCK: “What are you talking about?”
BILL: “You said there was no short cut to it.”
HANCOCK: “That’s right.”
BILL: “Well, how did you get there then?”
HANCOCK: “William, literacy is not a place.”
BILL: “What is it then?”
HANCOCK: “It’s a state of being.”
BILL: “Being what?”
HANCOCK: “Being literate.”
BILL: “Ohhh. My dog had two literates once…”
HANCOCK: “Your dog did not have literates. Your dog had litters. L-I-T-E-R-S.”
(‘Hancock’s School’)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Hattie Jacques with Hancock

The role of ‘sensible female’ went initially to Moira Lister (whose film comedy, including Norman Wisdom’s film debut Trouble in Store, proved that she should be seen as well as heard!), then in April 1955 to Andrée Melly (The Belles of St Trinian’s, The Brides of Dracula), playing a French girl who suspiciously loses her accent between series. Both were described as Hancock’s ‘girlfriends’, a relationship which sounded more and more unconvincing as Hancock’s character developed, and as a result they became rather a fifth wheel to the serious stuff of making people laugh. So out went Andrée and in came the wonderful Hattie Jacques as the massively proportioned Miss Grizelda ‘Grizzly’ Pugh, the ‘New Secretary’ of November 1956. Only then did the team truly hit perfection.

After having trouble with his paperwork, Hancock puts an ad in the paper: “Secretary wanted. Blond, 19, 37-22-36½, or nearest offer… well that ought to attract the wrong sort of girl.” In walks the large-boned Miss Pugh, who apparently is constantly being mistaken for a famous Beauty Queen (Hancock: “What a mistake!”). Following countless jokes about her size (Hancock asks what happened to the promised 36-23-35½; “It’s all here,” explains Grizzly proudly. “I didn’t mean your leg measurements, dear!”) and lack of office space, Hancock hires her after she explains the purpose of her umbrella, with its weighted end and rust-coloured stains. Further complications arise when Sid grows infatuated with this mysterious Eastern princess, brought about initially by his discovery that the fascinating Miss Pugh signs Hancock’s cheques. A certain friction occurs in ‘Cyrano de Hancock’, when Hancock mistakenly proposes to an over-eager Miss Pugh. Naturally, Hancock escapes Sid’s big knife when he accidentally marries the registrar, played by Kenneth Williams.

KEN / ‘SNIDE’: “I listen to your radio show every week.”
HANCOCK: “Oh, do you like it?”
SNIDE: “No, I think it’s rotten. All except that bloke with the funny voice. He’s a scream, isn’t he? Ooh, he has me in stitches. You know, there are actually people like that.”
HANCOCK: “Get away!”
SNIDE: “No there are, honest. I met some. You wanna hang on to him. Only thing in the programme, he has me on the floor…”
(‘The Emigrant’)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

A vastly erudite man, Kenneth Williams was undoubtedly a comedy great. Just a few words after affecting his trademark thin nasal voice, whether they be “Good eve’nin’” or “Stop messin’ about” or “Don’t be rotten”, was enough to reduce an audience to hysterics. It was a great shame he clung onto the Carry On films throughout their run; good as he was in them, his insecurity made him shy away from diversifying into more challenging roles on film and stage. Indeed, it seems a further ambiguity to his character that, as revealed in the The Kenneth Williams Diaries, he found all of these comedy parts very much beneath him.

But Hancock’s Half Hour was near the beginning of his career and fame found him quickly. He played a range of characters, adopting the voice of gruff old men, suave sophisticates, irritating officials, inept doctors, judges and the like, but after the third series he became most famous for the seemingly omnipresent whining idiot christened off-air as ‘Snide’. He would usually appear towards the end of episodes, and would invariably get more laughs than Hancock. (That was to be the Ken’s downfall: he left soon after Hancock had Snide removed before the fifth radio series in 1958, criticising Williams’ “cardboard caricatures”, and he only appeared in a handful of the earlier TV shows.)

‘The Diary’ closes with one of Hancock’s Half Hour‘s most famous sequences, ‘The Test Pilot’, in which our hero imagines himself as Wing Commander Hancock: RAF stiff upper lip, pride of England and massively moustached (Bill: “The best thing to do is tie it around the back of your neck, it’ll cut down wind resistance”). Taking a revolutionary, wingless, vertical take-off plane out through the fanlight, Hancock is informed that the mechanic has gone missing. Until, that is, he hears a strange tapping on the cockpit and slides it open. It’s Kenneth Williams’ Snide, who’d been working on the tail, singing to himself, when: “Whooosh! I was up ‘ere.” Kenny accidentally discovers the ejector switch and they both end up clinging to the tail:

SNIDE: “Isn’t life funny? In the papers this morning, the stars said it was my lucky day.”
HANCOCK: “If we keep going up at this rate, you’ll be able to tell them they’re wrong!”
SNIDE: “… Oooh, I’m scared. Oooh!”
HANCOCK: “Don’t panic, man. This is the RAF. Where’s that stiff upper lip?”
SNIDE: “Just above this loose flabby chin.”

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

If Anthony Hancock had one true friend in the series, it was the nameless character played by co-writer Alan Simpson in the earlier episodes. A bystander, he was the rapt audience to Hancock’s long-winded tall stories, and occasionally had delusions of stardom by ad-libbing more than the odd “Yes”, “Dear oh dear” or “Did you really?” The stories were little more than padding, and were dropped by the third series. Here’s a good example, from ‘A House on the Cliff’ (the italicized bits are Simpson):

I come from a long line of builders, me, you know. [Do you?] My great grandfather helped to build the Tower Bridge. [No?] Yes, he was the bloke who sawed it in half. [Was he?] … Anyway, me biggest job, that was the one I was going to tell you about, undoubtedly was the Forth Bridge. [Ah, yes] It was the Forth Bridge. I remember distinctly because the other three fell in. [Did they?] Yes. Anyway, I was in charge. I decided we’d start building from both sides and meet in the middle … We were going along like a house [On fire?] On fire. You should’ve put that in. We’d build the first 27 yards in three seconds. [No?] Well, we had to. There was a train behind us! Well, we was doing very well right up until the fog sprang up. [Ooh dear] Well, I dunno how it happened: the long and the short of it was, we passed each other. Well, I felt a right toby jug, I’m telling you. [Well, you would do] There was the other half of the bridge twenty yards past me and six feet on one side. Well, I blamed it on the crane driver. ‘Course the bloke who was the lifting the big girders about; ‘It’s your fault,’ I said. I was annoyed. [Well, naturally] Puce, I was. [Yes] The whole face was red with anger. [You said 'puce'] Well, I did. I got the right to change my mind, haven’t I? [Yes] Thank you very much. [Carry on] Just keep chipping in, don’t try and dominate. Well, as I said me whole face was red with anger. I clenched me fists till the muscles on me arms stood out like marbles. I went over to him, I shook me fist. ‘It’s your fault’, I said. ‘You weren’t looking where you were going’, I said. ‘Undo all that lot’, I said, ‘and go back and start again’, I said. It was me speaking. Well, I don’t know whether it was the authority in me voice, or the sense of shame he must have felt, but he did it without a murmur. I should have said, he done it without a murmur, I’m sorry. [It doesn't matter] Grammatical mistake, we can all go wrong. He could see I meant it. He started his crane up and got going, ‘cos he was eager to rectify his mistake, see? [Yes, of course] Anyway, I’ll never forget it, never forget it, just as if was today. Swinging this huge crane around like a toy, dead keen. And do you know, he had a sort of sheepish, apologetic smile on his face as… just as I walked away … having won me point… being the foreman – do you know what he did? [What?] He dropped a ten tonne girder on me head…

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Rado Times for week 8-14 December 1957 Galton and Simpson often gave full rein to their imaginations in earlier episodes, resulting in many far-fetched storylines. These often took the form of fantasy or dream sequences which involved Hancock becoming Prime Minister, Father Christmas or, as in the aforementioned ‘The Diary’, an eminent surgeon, lion trainer and test pilot. In the wonderful ‘The Emigrant’, Hancock’s desperate attempts to enter Australia, Canada, South Africa, India or even Baffin Land culminate in a journey on a plane ‘piloted’ by Snide. Inevitably it crashes, and Hancock finds himself at the pearly gates. When Hancock announces himself, an angel suggests, “Have you tried the other place?”

The writers possessed a great skill for vividly conjuring up the most implausible scenes and situations through dialogue and the economic use of sound effects. They also took great risks with their use of silence – usually considered ‘dear air’ on the radio - as in the well-known ‘Sunday Afternoon at Home’, which conveyed crushing boredom with its long, and somehow hilarious, stretches without dialogue. Similarly, ‘Sid James’s Dad’ features about a minute of just clattering metal as Sid, in an act of good will and generosity, empties his pockets and returns everything he stole from Hancock during his last visit.

However hilarious the results of their earlier flights of fancy were, Galton and Simpson seemed to realise over the course of the series that it was the humdrum of everyday life that inspired the funniest material. Such simple scenarios include trying to get to sleep, paying a tax bill, buying a car or a television, going on a picnic or a hospital visit, or getting home from the cinema. Full of accurate observation, these scripts reveal absurdity in the mundane.

It would be untrue to say that every one of the scripts is a masterpiece but Galton and Simpson did maintain a consistent quality throughout the 103 radio Half Hours, particularly from the fourth series onwards, by which time they had truly nailed the radio medium and Hancock’s character. Each story has the seemingly effortless feeling of having been improvised by the cast as they went along, and the scripts seem almost naturalistic (in a comedy framework) because of this.

By the sixth radio series in 1959, the television version of Hancock’s Half Hour was seriously overshadowing its counterpart. With Tony Hancock the highest ranking TV star at that time, he decided to move on from radio and only undertook the sixth series with reluctance (also, since it had to be hastily written, he was concerned that it might not be up to scratch). On 29th December 1959, two days before the beginning of a new decade, the final radio episode, ‘The Impersonator’, was transmitted.

Tony Hancock

Hancock himself remains something of an enigma; his talent is plain for everyone to see and it is difficult to understand why he was forever dissatisfied with it. He constantly strived for some elusive ‘secret of comedy’ that would somehow enlighten mankind. As he said himself to John Freeman: “The only happiness I could achieve would be to perfect the talent that I have, whatever it may be, however small it may be, that is the whole purpose it of it and that is the whole purpose of what I do.” This would seem to have been unattainable as Hancock discovered when he rid himself of the team that had contributed so much to the success of the radio and television series. He went his own way and everything went downhill from there.

That the radio Hancock’s Half Hours worked was down to the show’s perfect combination of actors and writers, particularly during its heyday with Hattie Jacques. Although Tony Hancock had top billing, it’s the interplay between the whole array of contrasting and likeable characters that made it so special. Like so many comedy shows from the time, it was a collective effort. The humour was not complicated, but then it didn’t have to be. Tony, Sid, Ray, Alan and the rest of the team made people laugh - and it’s a rare achievement that today, half a century later, they still are.

Tags: , ,

To accompany my interview with Sam Youd, this is an article I wrote in 1999 for Circus 8 on Sam’s best known pen-name, John Christopher, under which he wrote such enduring classics as the Tripods and Sword of the Spirits trilogies and The Death of Grass.
 

In a review in the Independent newspaper of Brian Aldiss’ autobiography, The Twinkling of an Eye, John Christopher was said to be one of the five ‘most important British science-fiction writers’. Aldiss himself has often spoken of his admiration for John Christopher, describing him in Billion Year Spree as ‘an intelligent and witty man, marvellously equipped as a writer’. One rarely comes across this kind of recognition, which is a great shame as John Christopher, real name Sam Youd, fully deserves it for his important contribution to British science fiction over the last fifty years.

Christopher Samuel Youd was born in 1922 in Knowsley, Lancashire (‘the rural hinterland of Liverpool,’ as he once described it), but left for Hampshire at the age of ten, ‘a manoeuvre which he regards as in a sense equivalent to Dickens’s banishment to the blacking factory,’ where he attended Winchester’s Peter Symonds School. He became interested in science fiction at around the same time, particularly the American magazine stories that influenced the likes of John Wyndham, Arthur C Clarke and Kingsley Amis; he began his own sf fanzine, The Fantast, when he was seventeen. His first professionally published short story, ‘For Love of Country’, appeared in Lilliput in late 1939 (‘It was about an Anglophile German bomber pilot who tried to drop his stick in open country but hit the cleverly camouflaged factory my train passed every morning on my way to my job as a clerk in the County Medical Office at Winchester’). He served in the Royal Corps of Signals during World War II, and seriously turned his hand to writing after he was demobilised in 1946 and working in general publishing, then as assistant editor of a technical journal. Along with a number of young writers who could claim their careers had been interrupted by the war, he was given an Atlantic Award by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1946 (married by then, he was awarded the full £300, but had to promise not to do any non-writing work for a year). His first sf short story and his debut novel both appeared in 1949.

The story was the ‘Christmas Roses’ (published as ‘Christmas Tree’ in Astounding, February 1949, and still being reprinted as recently as 1979). It’s the melancholy story of Major Joe Davies, navigator on the Arkland. Anyone serving aboard a spacecraft is given a medical after landing, to assess the ‘cumulative stress’ on their heart caused by take-off and landing. Some last up to ten years from their first warning until they’re judged incapable of withstanding the strain – then, wherever they are, they’re stuck for the rest of their lives, ‘the exile, the outlaw who left it too late to get back’. Davies arranges to take a Christmas tree up to an old man, Hans, who has been stuck on Luna City, ‘a couple of blocks long, a block wide’, for forty years. While buying the tree, he is struck by the beauty of the countryside around Washington and decides he’ll retire there when he returns, to grow fir trees and Christmas roses. On arriving on the Moon, Davies discovers Hans died the night before; then, worse still, he fails his medical. At the end of the story, Davies mournfully watches Earth and the stars from the lunar surface – ‘I keep thinking I can smell roses.’

‘Christmas Roses’ is an assured and confident story dealing with timeless themes that still has the power to move – in fact, the only way in which time has been unkind is in the story’s talk of lichen and lunar insects that consume the dead. Youd would return to the premise of imprisonment in a lunar station in his children’s novel The Lotus Cavestwenty years later.

The Winter Swan (1949)The Winter Swan (1949) is a mainstream novel, but told in a manner not unfamilar to science fiction readers (of Martin Amis’s Time’s Arrow, for example), A common judgement of first novels is that they were often autobiographical, but he was determined not to qualify in that respect and instead told the story of an old woman named Rosemary Hallam. He then further reversed the norm by beginning the novel at her graveside in 1949, then telling her life story in reverse. Part of the interest of the novel arises from seeing the effect before the cause. Despite this striking originality, the novel was not a critical or commercial success (the Times Literary Supplement grudgingly admitted it was ‘not uninteresting’).

Unperturbed, Sam Youd continued to write mainstream novels in his spare time to supplement his poor income. Now with a family to support, he wrote, in a single draft, realistic and socially-aware novels, ‘penetrating the hidden motives of human behaviour’ (as the blurb of Holly Ash (1955) puts it). There was still the occasional fantasy element – the suggestion that Piers Merchant, the main character of Babel Itself (1951), might actually be the Devil, for instance – but Youd’s interest in sf was finding an outlet in the short stories he was writing at the same time, for sale to such magazines as Galaxy, Science Fantasy and, most notably, New Worlds. Most of them were set in the twenty-second century, where countries have been replaced by mega-corporations called ‘Managerials’; the thought being that entities governed by politics will slowly destroy civilisation, but commercial interests will perpetuate it. Individuality and creativity are no longer treasured. It’s all worryingly prescient. Many of these stories feature the exploits of Max Larkin, a director in one of these corporations, and all but one were written under Sam’s best-known pseudonym, John Christopher. A later novel, The Year of the Comet (1955), is set a century earlier and explains how this situation came about, wrapped up in a clever but wordy tale of Managerial plots and counter-plots.

The Managerial stories are collected in The Twenty-Second Century (1954) and although they are interesting, it’s in the other stories that pointers to future John Christopher themes are clearest.

The end of the world as we know it

In ‘Blemish’ (1953), enlightened aliens threaten to wipe out a supposedly advanced future Earth unless mankind relearns the value of family life from a small rural village it labels the ‘nut house’. We show our true colours in ‘Monster’ (1950), when a peace-loving creature on a mission to save its race is shot as it tries to make contact at Loch Ness. In ‘Begin Again’ (1954), radiation sickness from a nuclear war has wiped us out, and the last man on Earth meets the last woman against a grim backdrop of devastation – I’ll leave you to guess their names. In ‘The New Wine’ (1954), telepathy is induced into every unborn child, who go on to see a side to human nature so ugly they either die, commit suicide or chose celibacy. In short, the world ends, the thin veneer of civilisation removed.

The third John Christopher novel, The Death of Grass (1956), deals with this theme with visceral power. Although The Year of the Comet mentioned how the Managerial system had its roots in a similar disaster two centuries earlier (‘They got the lot – atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, breakdown, disease, famine’), here the author gives us the kind of description of the collapse of civilisation he would become famous for.

A mutant virus that kills all types of grass appears in China, and slowly works its way towards Britain, leaving starvation in its wake as grain crops wither and animals starve to death. Our scientists are smugly confident they can combat it, but the Chung Li virus, as it becomes known, develops new phases with unexpected speed and finally reaches us. John Custance, an architect, is warned by old Army friend Roger Buckley that their families should flee from London to John’s brother David’s farm in the Lake District. Friends in high places have informed him that the British government are planning the extreme step of bombing major cities before the now inevitable suffering and anarchy overwhelms them. Meeting the deceptively courteous gunsmith Henry Pirrie and his wife on the way, they begin a dangerous race for survival across a rapidly degenerating country.

The Death of Grass (1956)The national politics are cleverly and convincingly depicted, but the politics within the small group are more interesting. Roger, initially a major player in the book, quickly falls into the shadow of John as John’s uneasy relationship with Pirrie develops. Although John instinctively distrusts Pirrie, never more so than after Pirrie claims the right to execute his own wife, Millicent, for her repeatedly unfaithful behaviour, they soon learn to rely on one another. Pirrie needs John natural leadership skills, and John’s disgust at Pirrie’s brutal methods turns to a kind of admiration. John, through a series of encounters with violent bands, adopts Pirrie’s survivalist tactics, killing in cold blood whoever gets in his way, dispatching the weak who, by his and Pirrie’s rationale, with die soon anyway.

The author plays a dangerous game by making John, essentially the book’s central character, increasingly unlikable. Essentially, The Death of Grass, like so many of the Christopher novels, is about how normal people are changed and forced to adapt when their everyday lives are pulled from under them. John’s wife Ann asks to shoot the last of the men who raped her and her daughter, not long after expressing horror over the shooting of three soldiers at a roadblock. No reassuring middle-class John Wyndham heroes here.

Different people are affected in different ways, and Sam Youd deals well with the psychological consequences on his characters of their harsh new surroundings. John Custance wouldn’t hesitate to sacrifice weak, ineffectual Matthew Cotter in the later novel A Wrinkle in the Skin (1965), for instance.

A massive earthquake has struck Cotter’s home of Guernsey, the extent of which he is soon to discover. In the first of many memorable jolts to the imagination, Cotter looks out to where the sea was and sees this:

It was like a glimpse of another planet, a strange savage and barren world. He could see the tangled green of the great weed beds, the rawness of exposed rock and sand … The blue sweep of wave was gone. A sunken land was drying in the early summer sun.

He soon falls in with a band of survivors and allows himself to be bullied by their leader, Joe Miller, but remains fixated on his daughter Jane, who was staying in Sussex when the disaster struck. Her chances of survival are practically zero, but Cotter refuses to believe it. He crosses the bed of the English Channel to look for her with a small boy called Billy, a disorientating experience as he feels the sea could come rushing back at any moment. Following a brush with an insane captain aboard a stranded tanker, they arrive at the mainland and soon meet another, more friendly group. Cotter is particularly taken by a woman named April, on the ruins of whose house they’ve made camp, and whose husband and children she reburied in the garden. April would seem to be the ‘love interest’ of the novel, but following an attack by marauding youths comes the second shock of the novel, when Matthew involuntarily reacts with disgust when she tells him she was raped by them, and has been several times before. She tells him:

‘I don’t fear you. But I despise you. I despise you as a man. As a person, I think I envy you… Nothing has changed for you, except the scenery. For the rest of us it was God bringing our world crashing down about our ears, but for you it was – what? An epic in Cinemascope, Stereosound and 3-D. Jane is still alive, and you amble your way towards her through the ruins. Do you know what? I think you’ll find her. And she’ll be dressed in white silk and orange-blossom, and it will be the morning of her wedding to a clean young man with wonderful manners, and you’ll be just in time to give her away.’

Even after this character assassination, Cotter continues on his quest with the boy, Billy. It’s Billy’s ensuing sickness, and the third major revelation of the book (in which we discover what happened to the sea), that finally snaps Cotter out of his fantasy. The book ends on a quiet note of optimism for the future.

The World in Winter (1962) opens by asking us to accept the outrageous premise that Earth’s been tilted a few degrees, plunging Britain into a new Ice Age and forcing people to flee to the now-temperate Africa and South America to become penniless refugees, consigned to live in shanty towns. It’s a clever idea, a reversal of fortunes that contains some serious comments on racism. The frozen London, plunged into the characteristic Christopher anarchy, is a lot more nightmarish than other attempts at the theme (John Boland’s White August (1955), for instance, is more silly than chilly), but the book lacks the raw power of The Death of Grass and A Wrinkle in the Skin.

I’m no great fan of Pendulum (1968), a overly reactionary novel that extrapolates social and political changes that were taking place in the late-60s. In a nutshell, the government abolishes student grants (an uncanny prediction, as it turns out), and in order to bolster their protests the students bring in yobs. Anarchy ensues. The end comes from an unexpected direction: religious zealots overcome the yobs by even more brutal means, and the book ends with a disturbing coda, showing Britain in the grip of these ‘Brothers’, punishing anyone who steps out of line with death or detention to the Scottish islands. The book was written in a climate of ‘youth versus society’, where student riots were rife; a few years before were the seaside clashes between the so-called ‘Wild Ones’, and the papers were full of sensationalised reports on ‘the Unattached’, the groups of young people who baffled officialdom by not being interested in Youth Clubs and the like. Public distrust of the young was strong, and Pendulum is just as guilty by assuming that motorcycle and scooter gangs would have their wicked way with the entire country, given half the chance. I can just about accept tilting the Earth off its axis, but the nature of this catastrophe is even more questionable.

The human race is despatched more ruthlessly in the young adult novel Empty World (1977). Here Sam Youd describes the origins of the novel, and perhaps many of the novels I’ve just discussed:

I recalled a boyish daydream, of thinking how much fun it might be if adults were somehow (painlessly, involving no guilt) to disappear, and leave the world to me and a few like-minded buddies. The joy, for instance, of finding an unattended, up-for-grabs Woolworth store… fortuitously laden with months of back issues of science fiction magazines… The book explored the darker side of the daydream

Fourteen-year-old Neil Miller’s parents have died in a car crash, leaving him to live with his grandparents near Rye (Sam Youd’s home, incidentally), but making him better equipped to cope with what follows: a plague that sweeps across the world, killing everyone around him one by one. It starts with the old, but soon the children find they’re not immune – the plague gives them a wrinkled, aged appearance before death, which makes the loss of two youngsters Neil comes across after he’s sure the virus has gone all the more shocking (‘He stopped some feet away, struggling not to show his incredulity and horror. A little old man stared at him from the face of a child.’). On his subsequent travels to London, Neil encounters only three other people, all children. He follows a message to a house, but finds the boy who wrote it was so consumed by loneliness that he hung himself only hours before. Later he finds a footprint in the Cosmetics department of Harrods and meets a pair of Girl Fridays, one of whom harbours a dangerous jealousy against Neil as he grows closer to her friend. The book is left open-ended, though not deliberately; a sequel was a possibility for a while.

The will to survive is strong in these books, but at the end of each it’s made clear that there are many more ordeals to come, and that humanity has to rebuild more than just its numbers.

The remainder of the John Christopher adult novels are a mix of different genres – thriller, psychological horror, some sf – but they often focus on an small group of people, isolated and fighting for survival.

In The Caves of Night (1958), a party of five people trapped in an Austrian cave system are gradually whittled down to the female lead, and her husband and her lover, and a situation in which she has to decide who lives and who dies. A Scent of White Poppies (1959) is a straight thriller about drug-smuggling (not one of Sam Youd’s favourites – his agent used to refer to it as ‘the dogshit book’ after an office typo rendered the title as ‘Puppies’!). The Long Voyage (1960) has an even more varied cast: dispirited sailors, a travelling circus family (and their bear!), an eloping couple with a typewriter case full of cash – all stranded in the Arctic after a storm cripples their ship. First Officer Mouritzen is a flawed hero typical of Sam Youd’s work: he spends the bulk of the book wooing Mary, who’s travelling with her daughter to marry a Dutchman she’s never met, but then, at a time of weakness, tries to bed circus girl Nadya. The Possessors (1965) concerns a party of tourists confined to a Swiss skiing chalet by an avalanche, under attack from an alien straight out of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Most significant are Cloud on Silver (1964) and The Little People (1967). The former reads an an intriguing cross between The Island of Doctor Moreau, Robinson Crusoe and Lord of the Flies. Again it concerns a stranded group of people, this time shipwrecked on a South Pacific island populated by deformed wildlife, and with a mysterious secret at the crest of the mountain that dominates it. Paranoia and mistrust grows, and there’s a science fiction solution, but it’s overshadowed by a climax that’s really very horrid indeed.                 

Equally disturbing is the ending of The Little People. Bridget Chaucey unexpectedly inherits a castle in the wilds of Ireland, and decides to run it as a hotel in the few months before her marriage to Daniel. She finds German artefacts everywhere, a barred room full of doll’s houses, and later a tiny footprint. Bridget and her new guests soon discover the Little People, initially believed to be of Irish legend, but found to be the results of wartime Nazi experiments in Germany. They appear harmless, but it transpires they can use some kind of mind control while the humans sleep to force them to confront unpleasant areas of their past (and future). Waring Selkirk, an American whose marriage has disintegrated into savage rowing, has a vision of himself and his wife a few decades in the future, their hatred more vicious than ever. Daniel proves to be a violent coward who runs away when his fiancée needs his help, and kicks one of the Little People with ‘not just anger, but the need to maim, to kill, to destroy utterly’. Stefan and Hanni Morwitz are hit the worst. He is a German who fought in the war; she is his Jewish wife, who the People feed experiences of a Nazi extermination camp. Stefan is consumed by guilt over his Nazi father (‘on terms of near equality’ with Himmler) and his desire for Hanni’s forgiveness for the atrocities of his people, leaving him in a kind of waking coma. The People themselves are merely catalysts to these events, which prove beneficial to some and devastating to others, and it’s to the author’s credit that he makes such a daft-sounding idea truly menacing.

As well as those under his own name, Sam Youd had also been writing novels under various other pseudonyms: humorous young-adult cricketing novels as William Godfrey; two novels about Felix, ‘the angriest of the Angry Young Men’, and an espionage thriller as Hilary Ford; four thrillers as Peter Graaf, three of them featuring Joe Dust, a private eye with a shady past over from Brooklyn; and a further thriller about Nazi spies as Peter Nichols. Then it was suggested that he should try to pick up a new audience by writing a science fiction novel for children. Futuristic novels no longer interested him (although, perhaps prompted by the excitement surrounding the Apollo missions, he would later write the bizarrely imaginative The Lotus Caves (1969)), so he took his inspiration from the past. The sf novel became a trilogy, and, apart from three Gothic romances written as by Hilary Ford (which he considered a poor attempt at emulating Jane Austen: ‘I have committed many follies, but never that of thinking I was in her league, or capable of promotion to its lower reaches’), he remained devoted to his new generation of readers.

After the Tripods came

The Tripods Trilogy (1967-68)Returning briefly to The Twenty-Second Century, one of its short stories, ‘Weapon’ (1954), provides the clearest preview of things to come. The military use a boy who can see into the future to find out what the ultimate weapon will in a hundred years’ time – it turns out to be the crossbow. Sam Youd’s most famous novels are probably those set on a future Earth that has, for a variety of reasons, reverted back to a medieval, pastoral existence – the first of these works was the Tripods trilogy (1967/68). Generally regarded as the point at which children’s science fiction really grew up, the trilogy is detailed elsewhere in this issue, so I won’t dwell on it too long.

Part of the fun of the novels is their description of twentieth-century artefacts and places that are commonplace to us but mysterious and almost magical to Will and his friends. Early on in The White Mountains his father’s Watch, ‘a miniature clock with a dial less than an inch across and a circlet permitting it to be worn on the wrist’, is a source of wonderment to Will, as is this sign:

DANGER
6,600 VOLTS
We had no idea what Volts had been, but the notion of danger, however far away and long ago, was exciting. There was more lettering, but for the most part the rust had destroyed it.    LECT    CITY: we wondered if that were the city it had come from.

Will and Henry are introduced to maps by Ozymandias, and soon the country of the French, railway lines (the carriages are pulled by horses, but Beanpole envisages a more efficient form of traction powered by a machine ‘like a very big kettle’), and the City of the Ancients, Paris – again, not identified by name, but recognisable from the descriptions of the ruins. Here they find an underground ‘Shmand-Fair’, where, they later realise, Parisians must have made their last stand against the invading Tripods. There’s ‘a rack full of wooden things ending in iron cylinders’ – guns – and a box full of large metal eggs. ‘[Henry] picked one out, and showed it to Beanpole. It was made of iron, its surface grooved into squares, and there was a ring at one end. Henry pulled it, and it came away.’ Of course, there’s tension now for any reader who recognises the description as that of a hand grenade.

The rediscovery of our technology, most crucially balloons and bombs, eventually helps overcome the rule of the Masters, but the coda to The Pool of Fire, set two or three years later, shows that this might not be such a good thing. With the Masters’ suppression of mankind’s instinct to kill each other removed, we’re at each other’s throats again.

The later, modern-day ‘prequel’ to the trilogy, When the Tripods Came (1988), is more juvenile in tone, but nonetheless interesting. Common Christopher concerns resurface, such as families broken by divorce, and children’s resentments of a new step-family. It doesn’t really cast any fresh light on the earlier books, although there is some foreshadowing of events to come, and some nice digs at Brian Aldiss’s criticisms of a three-legged object’s basic inability to walk properly, and the Tripods’ lack of infra-red capabilities.

Following the Tripods trilogy, The Guardians (1970) again dealt with the value of freedom, and won Sam Youd, appropriately, both the Guardian award and the Christopher award for best children’s book, in 1971, and the prestigious German Jugendbuchpreis award in 1976. It tells of an oppressed future Britain in which great fences have been erected around the proletarian Conurbs (towns), where books and free thought are frowned upon. Any attempts to change the system are crushed using brutal means by the powerful Guardians, whose secrets the young hero Rob Randall discovers when circumstances following the suspicious death of his father force him to run away to the aristocratic County (country). A very powerful novel, originally planned, but never written, as an adult book; its themes are about as adult as a children’s book can get. Wild Jack (1974), originally written as an English-as-a-Foreign-Language text but later expanded into a children’s novel (though the latter was released first), is another fight for truth and freedom in a sterile, controlled Britain, with allusions to the legend of Robin Hood. The novel was originally the first of a trilogy – indeed, the follow-up was written but not released. Similarly written as an EFL text, Dom and Va (1972) is set half a million years ago, the grim tale of the conflict between a tribe of hunters and another, more culturally advanced tribe. A scene in which Dom tries to beat his female lover Va caused controversy with feminists, despite that fact that she thwarts the attempt – as a female colleague pointed out to Youd, Va is depicted as cleverer and more characterful than Dom, and gets all the best lines.

There’s a great deal of human ugliness in the Sword of the Spirits trilogy (1970-72) too. Again the setting’s a future England regressed to more primitive times, this time by volcanos and earthquakes, and an increase in solar radiation which has caused genetic mutations, known as ‘Polymufs’ and used as slaves. England is apparently under the power of the machine-hating Spirits and their human servants, the Seers. Luke Perry, Prince in Waiting to the city of Winchester, sees everyone he loves die around him, through treachery and deceit, during the course of the books, including his own brother at his own hand. He discovers the Spirits are faked by the Seers, who actually seek to reintroduce machinery and electricity, and see Luke as the ideal ruler for this aim. Luke falls in love with ‘Wilsh’ princess, Blodwen, and her father promises her to him, but her love is for his best friend Edmund. When he finds out, his stupid reaction gets him exiled from the city in disgrace. Luke’s wounded pride makes much of the final book uncomfortable reading. He gathers an army around himself, armed with lethal Sten guns made from specifications provided by the Seers, and fights for his honour and his title. Luke is determined that Edmund and Blodwen should die and Winchester should suffer, but blind to how wrong his actions are. Whole armies are slaughtered in the pages before the downbeat ending.

There are obvious allusions to the legend of King Arthur, from the sword Luke is presented with, to the play which triggers Luke’s suspicions of Blodwen’s true loyalties, based on the romance between Sir Tristram and Ysolde. A further short story, ‘Of Polymuf Stock’ (1971) is set during the events of the trilogy, and the most recent John Christopher novel, A Dusk of Demons (1993), returns to the theme of a controlling, but ultimately fake, religion created by those who seek to preserve, and eventually bring back, old-time technology, as the ending (reminiscent of John Wyndham’s The Chrysalids) reveals. It also has another post-catastrophe background, society having crumbled after being afflicted by a machine-fearing ‘Madness’. To anyone who writes this off as ‘kids’ stuff’, here’s the description of the eponymous Demons:

I saw a writhing tangle of shapes, winged and scaled and slimy, rotting faces oozing filth, hideous reptilian arms stretching out … reaching down to grasp me

Like The White Mountains, Fireball (1981) was conceived as a standalone novel, but the author returned to the story when another novel, a fantasy version of Arthurian legend, ground to a halt. The Fireball trilogy (1981-86) is an interesting alternate world story, which sees two cousins, the British Simon and the American Brad (again from broken families), transported by a strange fireball to a brutal Europe where the Romans still rule and slavery is common. Unwillingly swept along by the course of events, the boys realise that this ‘If’ world isn’t confined to Europe, and their adventures take them to the Americas and a China torn apart by civil war. Fireball, the first novel, starts off well, but most of the characters and bloody later events are told too swiftly to evoke much sympathy. The two central characters are interesting though, clashing personalities who often find themselves at loggerheads, and, by Dragon Dance, the best and most colourful of the trilogy, they’re even fighting for opposing armies. But during the trilogy’s three year time-span they realise they have more in common than they first thought.

The aforementioned A Dusk of Demons is Sam Youd’s last novel to date. As he describes in the following interview, he has attempted – and sadly failed – to interest a publisher in his memoirs. Also, since Dusk, a lifelong interest in Arthurian legend prompted him to try his hand at an adult trilogy told from the viewpoint of Marius Linus (aka Merlin); the first book would have culminated in a young Arthur seizing the sword from the Stone – but lack of time and the problem of finding a publisher in the difficult historical field intervened, and the project ground to a halt at Chapter 6 without even being given a title. Another novel, a futuristic adult ‘Eurothriller’ called Bad Dream, was completed a few years ago but not picked up by a publisher. I’ve been fortunate enough to read the first chapter, and can only say it would be a tragedy if the book isn’t published in one form or another (at the time of writing, there’s the possibility it might appear on the Internet at some point).

I hope that’s not the end of the story.

The adult novels are uncompromising, but Youd makes few concessions for children either. Not once does he talk down to the younger reader; his themes are every bit as sophisticated as before. At the heart of each of his books is solid storytelling and humane values, related by well-drawn characters we can all identify with, struggling in a world that’s falling apart around them. Whereas the running theme of the best adult John Christopher novels is ‘What happens to ordinary people when the props of civilisation are removed?’, in his children’s books the props are the other kind: the initially safe world of the lead characters is revealed to be a facade, usually stage-managed by evil or misguided oppressors. If this leads the young reader to be wary of institutions – whether they be governments, religions, or any other established edifice – to ask questions, then that’s just one achievement for which Sam Youd deserves the praise that opened this article.

Tags: , , ,

I ♥ Christopher H Bidmead

It's him, it's Christopher H Bidmead!I’ve just finished reading Jason Arnopp’s excellent interview with Christopher H Bidmead in the latest DWM. Bidmead was the script editor during a period of Doctor Who in the early 1980s that divides opinion, depending on whether you like your Who as a fluffy confection or a more downbeat affair grounded in hard science. I’ve got a soft spot for it, but it does feel stuffy, especially after the larks of previous years.

In the interview Bidmead puts his finger on so many problems in current Who it’s almost a shame the piece appears in something as pro-nu-Who (though understandably!) as DWM. In this context he comes across as a grumpy old bugger who needs to, like, move with the times. But he’s so right about some of RTD’s storytelling decisions. My favourite f’rinstance is when he goes on at length about how the sonic screwdriver is a killer of ingenuity. We say ah, but wait, why waste valuable minutes and brain cells getting the Doctor through a locked door by other means? Russell said as much during Series One, was very jolly about it and we all nodded at such wisdom. But Bidmead points out, if the story slows down while the Doctor escapes by luring a Dalek onto a cloak or whatever, then “What the hell is the door doing there?” Seems obvious really, and can be applied elsewhere: if showing the Doctor unconvincingly descending a lift shaft is a waste of screen-time, why keep your pustulent zombie types downstairs?

I do love it, this new phenomenon. It’s full of zest and colour. Sometimes I’m disappointed by what’s underneath, but it seems ungrateful to complain after clamouring for so long to get it back. But while we’re all chuckling at Bidmead’s endearing grumpiness, recalling the other miserablists that have graced DWM‘s pages – I’m looking at you Boucher, Priest, Clive Swift, Richard Martin – you can’t help but agree when he says RTD’s scripts often feel like first drafts. The ones that don’t are the ones that tend to have had the hard work already done by other writers. First drafts are messy, undisciplined things, full of excess. If you’ve got a scene like the one in the first draft of ‘Journey’s End’, where our hero uses the TARDIS to tow a planet home, then that’s OK, you’ll think of something a bit less deranged in the rewrites. How I wish Bidmead had caught that one, especially as he and Davies often dabble in similar waters: I long to see Bidmead gesticulating wildly in a 1981 Doctor Who Confidential, describing his companion-heavy planet-hopping season finale as ‘massive’, with the fate of the universe at stake, etc etc. It may have a scene in it where the Doctor has the foolproof plan of materialising the TARDIS underwater and opening the doors, but hey, there are always the rewrites. Pssst, 1981-Christopher, in a future episode the Doctor actually drains the Thames! Yeah, I know that makes no sense, but trust me it’s an absolute riot!

So Christopher, I thought you came across as a bit of a plum on the DVD extras, full of yourself, keen to distance yourself from criticism. But I like you again now, you speak a lot of sense and seem like a thoroughly nice bloke. I think the Moff should install you in the Upper Boat basement as his irascible unpaid scientific advisor.

Tags:

<Disclaimer> I wrote this article, on writer Robert Holmes’ work in the 80s, way back in 1993 for the first issue of Circus. It’s a bit cocksure and probably riddled with factual errors, but it holds up reasonably well I think. </Disclaimer>

 

Bob plus trusty pipeDuring one of the economic ice ages that regularly grip our household I bought a Citroën 2CV. The salesman assured me that this machine was the last word in frugality with an engine that ran on gnat’s water. ‘Ran’, in this context, is probably the wrong word. It sort of ambled. But it was a fine car and gave one plenty of time to admire the scenery. There was also the excitement of burn-ups with passing tractors and invalid carriages.

I mention this only because it fills up some of my fifteen hundred words and also to make my point that I am the 2CV of scriptwriters.

Robert Holmes, ‘A Life of Hammer and Tongs’ (The Doctor Who File)

Robert Holmes’ last work for Doctor Who after Anthony Read took over from him as script-editor was ‘The Power of Kroll’, a story with which he was naturally unhappy. He had been asked to write a script that revolved around the largest monster in the programme’s history, a feat he found difficult, particularly when he disliked traditional lumbering monsters, relying instead on unusual, appealingly quirky characters. Although it isn’t in any writer’s nature to deliberately produce sub-standard work, Holmes’ last Who story for six years must have been a disappointment to him.

He was hardly idle in those six years. After turning down the post of its script-editor, Holmes wrote four excellent episodes for Blake’s 7, including ‘Gambit’, considered by many to be the series’ best story, certainly its most unusual. In 1980 he took over from Bob Baker as script-editor for season two of Shoestring, and in 1981 adapted David Wiltshire’s novel Child of the Vodyanoi into the acclaimed BBC1 serial The Nightmare Man.

Holmes had also outlined a series for LWT, as Jon Thurley (Holmes’ agent from 1967 onwards) describes: “[Bob] wrote a very funny and extremely black comedy which was piloted with Bob Hoskins and Jimmy Cossens playing two escaped convicts on the run, who, during the course of their picaresque adventures meet an apocalypic tramp who lights a cigarette and accidentally immolates himself, and a black prostitute who throws them off her pitch under Waterloo arches. It was reluctantly concluded that the series was probably too rich for the audience of the time, and LWT did not make the series!”

The Six Doctors

In 1982 Doctor Who‘s Twentieth Anniversary was looming, and John Nathan-Turner and Eric Saward planned to celebrate it in a style reminiscent of ‘The Three Doctors’ in 1973. Nathan-Turner had known Holmes socially for many years before producing Who, having both worked at Threshold/Union House in the early 70s. Nathan-Turner: “It was a wonderful place to work, with a constant cross-pollination of ideas, individuals and aspirations”.

Saward had been keen for Holmes to return, having seen enough old Who stories to realise that he was one of the programme’s finest living writers. Nathan-Turner was reluctant, according to a dubious [DWB 57] interview with Saward, because JNT was “frightened of him”. However, this time Nathan-Turner’s own explanation is more likely: “I did have, initially, a reticence to consider Bob as a writer; his involvement in Who had been of a specific direction, instigated in no small way by Bob himself, and I wanted to have time for our team to focus its objectives. ‘The Five Doctors’, in our view, required a writer steeped in the Who mythos – QED.”

‘The Five Doctors’ required, naturally, the involvement in some way of every Doctor, plus a wealth of returning monsters and companions, all to be fitted into a coherent and entertaining storyline, but more difficultly, ninety minutes. A near impossible task for even a most accomplished writer such as Holmes.

Eric Saward [DWB 57 again] : “I remember when Bob walked into the office. He came in a big man, tall, ex-policeman many years ago and he still had that presence. I think he looked at John and I and thought ‘Crikey, a couple of real jerks here’! He was wrong because he shouldn’t have made it so obvious, but he was right in that we were being silly about what we wanted. John wanted the Cybermen, the Master and the all the other bits and pieces that came into it, and Bob said: ‘Forget it, the Cybermen are stupid, they don’t work very well and I like creating original characters’ … Still we asked Bob to continue and we said we’d commission him to do it but he wasn’t certain he could make the story work … So Bob went off and wrote 14 or 15 pages of the script and I read them and to be honest they weren’t very good. I don’t know what had gone wrong, I mean, they were funny but it was ploddy and it was as if his heart was not really in it.”

Unfortunately, neither Saward nor Nathan-Turner now remember Holmes’ story Holmes rarely committed detailed storylines to paper although it is known he planned for Sutekh to return as the villain of the piece. Not surprisingly, Holmes quickly withdrew from the project, [Nathan-Turner:] “feeling we were giving him too many confines within which to work. It was totally amicable and I understood completely.” [Holmes' five pages of storyline suggestions for the story (working title 'The Six Doctors') has since been published in Doctor Who The Handbook - The Fifth Doctor (1995). I like the idea of a robot First Doctor, explaining why he looks different to how we remember, and Maladoom's a cool planet name! CB]

What none of these versions of events mention are the details of Terrance Dicks’ involvement, which goes some way to showing the somewhat irresponsible way many respected writers and directors were being handled during this period. Dicks: “Eric Saward phoned me at a Who convention in New Orleans and asked me if I’d like to write the Anniversary Special. Naturally, I accepted.

“On my return to England, Eric told me that Bob was already working on the special, but there were ‘problems’. Would I like to write my own Special in parallel with Bob so the production team could choose the best one? I felt this was no way to treat a writer of Bob’s status or come to that, of mine and rejected the invitation. Some time after that, Eric called again and told me that Bob had withdrawn from the project. Would I like to write the Anniversary Special … which, eventually, I did!”

Ideas

Robert Holmes’ television work was by now beginning to dry up. During the mid-80s he had plenty of ideas for television series, but none of them came to fruition. It had long been his desire to write a series on the life of the newspaper baron Alfred Harmsworth, Lord Northcliffe (a formidable character who, for better or worse, pioneered the modern tabloid format, taking control of The Times in 1908), but the project was never to be. Likewise a very black comedy idea concerning the inhabitants of a nuclear fall-out shelter after the bomb had dropped. The idea was very popular with other writer friends and Jon Thurley, and he was begged to soft pedal it a little and make it commercial. He wouldn’t, so it was never made.

As fellow script-writer Roger Marshall puts it, “I suppose, in retrospect, he spent too much of his life tinkering around with lesser writers’ work rather than getting on with his own. Some of his best ideas were still born.

“To know Bob you have to appreciate that in his laid back, pipe-smoking, way he was never terribly ambitious. I always felt he should have pushed himself harder and done better things. It wasn’t to be … He joined my agent, but never really changed his ways.”

Eric Saward had got on very well with Holmes during their trials on ‘The Five Doctors’: “What can I say about Bob? He was difficult, arrogant, highly critical and rude… but then people who care about their work often are. I liked Bob Holmes very much both as a writer and as a person. He was a positive and honest man who said what he thought. As a writer I found him very easy to work with. Because he knew his trade well he would be quick to accept suggestions or criticisms that would strengthen or reinforce his stories it’s only bad writers who never want to listen to what others have to say.”

Caves

Saward was keen to pursuade Nathan-Turner to offer Holmes another story, but without the cramping restrictions this time. Holmes could virtually do what he wanted, which was the way he liked it (see his time as script-editor!). Well, there was one imposition: the fifth Doctor wasn’t allowed to live through to the end of the story, which, as Holmes put it, “was an added ‘plus’ as far as I was concerned and an inducement for writing it.”

‘The Caves of Androzani’ is undoubtedly a masterpiece. Much has been written of ‘Androzani’, but suffice it to say that few stories are so blessed with a script and a director that constantly enhance each other, both racing througout the story for attention. It has been noted that the script itself reads as only about average Bob Holmes, but not really a classic. This is no criticism, as it is still brilliant, but is a great tribute to Graeme Harper’s imaginative direction.

‘Androzani’ is excellent and powerful drama, something Doctor Who often overlooked at that time in its eternal quest to stay within a cosy little science fiction/fantasy genre of its own concoction. Holmes was essentially a dramatist (with a love for gritty police/crime series), and with the exception of his early Who work, his scripts basically reflected that. When he attempted to be fantastic or satirical (‘The Carnival of Monsters’ and ‘The Sun Makers’), his style was still totally unique, completely his own, and still manages to hit the right mark. ‘Androzani’ comes as a bolt from the blue for the character of the fifth Doctor. One gets the feeling that this was (or should have been) his character right from the beginning, and it just took Holmes to bring it out, and craft a plot that would emphasise these points and see him off in style. Wonderful stuff, shame it came so late in the day.

The difference between ‘Androzani’ and the period that proceeded it is no better exemplified by the massive drop in quality between its final part and ‘The Twin Dilemma’ Part One. According to Ian Levine in a vaguely comical DWB [106] interview, Holmes watched the filming of the latter story while preparing his next script and reflected: “This is not what Doctor Who is all about, this is not how it should be.”

The Two Doctors (and How to Ruin It)

Sontar phew‘The Two Doctors’ was rapidly commissioned while ‘The Caves of Androzani’ was still in production, in late autumn 1983. Nathan-Turner was convinced that he could add New Orleans to his impressive track record of overseas filming, having used Amsterdam and Lanzarote during the two previous seasons. Holmes was initially a little unhappy when asked to include the Second Doctor and Jamie in the script, as well has bring back his own creations the Sontarans, disliking the re-use of elements from Doctor Who‘s past.

It did, however, give him the opportunity to return the Sontarans to their former glory after finding their last appearance in ‘The Invasion of Time’ disappointing. It also allowed him to use the idea of cannibalistic aliens, which he had previously suggested as the basis of a story to Anthony Read (who found it a little too strong!) Holmes describes the origins of the Androgums: “I couldn’t think of a reason why aliens should visit New Orleans and I recalled it was a jazz place but not even I could envisage a race of aliens obsessed with jazz and then I remembered it is the culinary centre of America, with lots of restaurants so I invented the Androgums, who are obsessed with food an anagram of gourmand. So they went to New Orleans for the food.”

‘The Seventh Ammendment’ (or ‘The Seventh Augmentment’? Also referred to variously as ‘Creation’, ‘Parallax’ and ‘The Kraglon Inheritance’) was to be set in a plantation house and surrounding bayou on the banks of the Mississippi, in the French quarter of New Orleans. Peter Moffatt was the assigned director of the story, which was in the process of rewrites, and the production manager was preparing a recce in search of suitable locations. The story was to be a co-production, partly financed by American backers (Lionheart). But, at this relatively late stage, they pulled out. Holmes and his script were left in the air for a while whilst replacement locations were being considered. Turning their attention on Europe, Venice was a possibility before it was realised that it would be impractical to film there during the August shooting dates, the tourist season. On finally deciding on the Seville region of southern Spain, a major rethink was required for the scripts.

Holmes by this time was beginning to tire of the story, now entitled ‘The Androgum Inheritance’, and his rewrites reflected this. The main plot and the essentials of the characters remained, but the transition from English-speaking country to Spanish-speaking country resulted in the loss of a lot of Holmes’ trademark witty dialogue. Saward appreciated that an excellent story had declined badly, saying “the story suffered because of all this messing about. It was all so embarrassing and down to lack of thought.” [DWB 58] Holmes was also having problems with the direction the programme was taking and it would seem that his writing quality was similarly deteriorating.

Season 22 did, however, give free rein to Holmes’ love of gruesomeness and blacker-than-black humour, and it certainly wasn’t to the tastes of everyone. The character of Shockeye displayed this, especially in the infamous scene where he takes a large bite out of a rat. I think it’s true to say that Holmes probably went a little too far in this case, but at least it’s dampened by the maelstrom of OTT violence in the stories that surrounded it.

That’s not to say that the final script isn’t enjoyable, it just lacks much of the usual Holmesian spark. The Sontarans work well enough in their new guise as more militaristic individuals, but are pushed into a background rôle by the weight of other (perhaps more interesting) elements, such as the story’s original characters which naturally Holmes gravitated towards. The Dastari/Chessene/Shockeye triangle works particularly well, although the characters still lack that extra dimension Holmes usually excelled in. Similarly, Oscar Botcherby is a poor man’s Henry Jago, on the surface the archetypal Holmesian pompous and blustering creation but ending up as a rather dull cypher. Worst of all, the story’s chief guest star, the second Doctor of its title, although characterised very well, spends most of the story tied and gagged, separated from his other self for far too long. The potential of a pairing between him and the Sixth Doctor is clear from the few scenes they share (rather than barging his way through the story and past lesser mortals like the usual irritating thug, for once the Sixth Doctor comes up against someone of equal force of character), but their interaction is criminally slight.

Novelisations

Holmes was approached by publisher WH Allen as part of their new policy of getting the original script-writers to write the novelisations wherever possible. He was initially reluctant, having already attempted to write the ‘Time Warrior’ adaptation, but giving up after the prologue, finding writing prose instead of scripts much too hard work and leaving Terrance Dicks to complete it. It was Dicks who finally persuaded Holmes of the merits of writing novelisations, and Holmes eventually agreed to adapt ‘The Two Doctors’. He didn’t find it easy, and wasn’t helped by the fact that he was very ill at the time. The then-editor of the Doctor Who range, Nigel Robinson: “He was very much of a perfectionist. Because of this the manuscript was, in fact, delivered rather late (I suspect that our schedules were changed around somewhat to accomodate the situation, and to ensure that The Two Doctors was, appropriately, the hundredth Who novelisation). I do remember that Bob wrote me a very nice note, expressing his gratitude at my patience: from my limited experience of him I do remember that Bob was, as well as being a very good writer and a true professional, a bit of a gentleman.

The Two Doctors was published pretty much as delivered though I had to tone down a little bit of the violence (though not as much as Ian Marter’s excesses!!!)”

Singapore

I see no reason why I shouldn’t carry on writing one script a year if I satisfy them, so hopefully I’ll carry on! It’s not so difficult trying to think up one story per year as it is six! I wouldn’t go back to being a Doctor Who script-editor.

Robert Holmes interviewed in DWM 100

Holmes was asked to write another story for the forthcoming twenty-third season, rather a fiasco by all accounts. After his success bringing back the Cybermen, the Sontarans and the Daleks the previous season, John Nathan-Turner intended the apply the same formula even more extravagently this time, in a story featuring more location filming, in Singapore this time, including [John Nathan-Turner:] “the Autons, the Master, the Rani, the street theatre (like the Noti theatre) in which the Rani appeared (white face and all) and a desire that the story opened with Peri’s wish to visit the US. The scanner would reveal the three-dimensional Statue of Liberty and on exiting the Tardis, they would discover they were in the ornamental gardens (name forgotten) where artefacts of the world were displayed in Singapore! This is an over-simplified version of a major discussion but it puts the germ of the idea in perspective.”

This sounds suspiciously like an imposition on Holmes by Nathan-Turner. Nathan-Turner and Gary Downie had done a recce, and apparently realising that they hadn’t achieved anything until their last day, hurriedly took shots of any interesting locations they found in the taxi on the way back to the airport. In a DWB interview, Saward says: “Bob Holmes and I sat in a viewing room and we watched this thing, which was about forty minutes long, and afterwards we just shrugged and thought, ‘Well, what is the point of this?’!”

Nathan-Turner: “The Singapore story never existed other than a video of some stunningly different locations – Indian, Colonial, Hi-tech, Shanty, Chinese, Period/ Modern.”

Saward: “The footage was as good as useless and we were both pleased it didn’t proceed further.”

This is all beginning to sound like another DWB rant, but it does go to show the impossible conditions writers must have experienced, or at least sensed, during those few years on Doctor Who.

Holmes did complete a vague storyline for the story, which used the same 3×45 minute format as ‘The Two Doctors’ and was intended to be filmed third. It was entitled ‘Yellow Fever’ (aka ‘Yellow Fever And How To Cure It’) by Holmes himself and ‘Singapore’ by Nathan-Turner,. It could have been the mess ‘The Two Doctors’ threatened to be had any more rewrites and changes been requested, but the season was postponed for eighteen months, giving the production team plenty of time for a rethink and to decide to recommission all the stories.

Before starting work on the transmitted Season 23, a four-page storyline of Holmes’ was vaguely adapted by Jim Hawkins as the pilot episode, ‘The Block’, for an intended science fiction anthology series misleadingly entitled Timeslip. The story, although unusual, suffered a severe case of visual style over substance and intelligable dialogue; the series never went ahead.

Trials

Mysterious...Although Holmes was less than happy with the way his talents were being treated, he did agree to write again for Doctor Who (as he had often stated, being a professional writer was still only a job, and he needed the money like everyone else), having become friends with Eric Saward. During the ‘hiatus’, the decision came from above to reduce the season to fourteen episodes, though Saward and Nathan-Turner were determined to make those episodes worth the fans’ patience (or lack of it).

Between them, Holmes and Saward came up with the basic structure of ‘The Trial of a Time Lord’, based loosely on the visions of the past, present and future featured in Dickens’ The Christmas Carol. Holmes was to write the the first four and the last two episodes leaving the season with some gigantic cliffhanger discussed with the season’s other original writers, Philip Martin, Jack Trevor Story and David Halliday. The latter two’s scripts were not used.

The characters of the Valeyard and the Inquisitor were Holmes’, who wrote the trial sequences into his first story, a black script entitled variously, ‘Wasteland’, ‘The Robots of Ravalox’ and ‘The Mysterious Planet’. The sequences that proliferated the other segments of the trial were Saward’s. Saward requested Holmes make the scripts ‘funnier’, following the direction Nathan-Turner planned to take after criticisms about the overt violence of the previous season.

With the scripts for those first four episodes apparently completed, they were sent to Jonathan Powell’s office for approval, as was normal procedure. Nicholas Mallett was assigned as director, while the scripts remained with Powell for several weeks. Finally the scripts returned with a notes from Powell extensively criticising the story. Powell is well-known in his dislike for Doctor Who and science fiction in general, so his criticisms were perhaps inappropriate. Holmes apparently performed rewrites, but as his attention shifted to the final two episodes, initially called ‘Time Incorporated’ (or ‘Time Inc.’), and as criticism continued from the Sixth Floor, it fell to Saward to extensively rewrite the story. How much of the script is Holmes’ and how much is Saward’s is difficult to guess, though Glitz and Dibber would appear a classic Holmes double-act (although, interestingly, it was these two characters Powell particularly objected to, so perhaps they were toned down by Saward?), as would Humker and Tandrell. Certain lines and exchanges, such as Sabalom Glitz’s talk of prison psychiatrists, sound Holmesian, but Saward has acknowledged how much his style had been influenced by Holmes. Overall though, the story is nothing special; although having an interesting premise, it is plotted rather dully. A traditional Doctor Who story, I suppose, but fans expected far more from Robert Holmes, on whose door criticism rather unfairly landed on the story’s transmission after his death.

Holmes had had trouble with his liver for many years, and he fell ill with another such affliction as he began work on the final two episodes of ‘The Trial of a Time Lord’. The details of the season’s climax hadn’t been specifically discussed with Saward and Nathan-Turner. Saward: “It was pointless until I had received all the scripts for the series. The only thing [Holmes and I] both wanted was that the Doctor was found guilty.”

Early on, Holmes was contacted again by Nigel Robinson in view of novelising the final two episodes of the season, which were then still yet to be written. Robinson: “Although not contracted (and this was before the final Baker season débâcle) Bob and I agreed that he was to novelise the final two episdoes of ‘Trial of a Time Lord’. I don’t know how Bob’s final script/novel would have turned out, but during a long and detailed chat on the phone Bob said that the Valeyard was very definitely the Doctor’s thirteenth regeneration (and not ‘somewhere between’ his twelth and final regeneration as stated in Pip and Jane’s televised version); also he planned the ending as a physical battle between the Doctor and the Valeyard, with the open-ended final episode closing with them both falling to their ‘deaths’ (a la Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty). Those were, at least, his ideas a few weeks before he died, though they may, of course, have changed during discussions with JNT and Eric Saward.”

With episode thirteen nearly completed and about twelve or thirteen minutes into the final episode, Robert Colin Holmes collapsed and fell into a coma. He died peacefully soon after on May 24th 1986, at Stoke Mandeville Hospital. He had been working on a big novel at the time of his death.

Tributes

Personally I consider him, with David Whitaker, the greatest writer to have worked on Doctor Who. As someone who never really appreciated his own talents, his scripts show a remarkable skill in giving the audience what they want. That is, compelling, unpredictable, often off-the-wall, stories, populated with equally bizarre and appealing characters. Although his 80s work shows something of a tailing off in quantity and indeed, quality, he was often working under difficult (and unprofessional) circumstances, and he left behind plenty of colourful stories during the 70s (‘Carnival of Monsters’, ‘The Talons of Weng-Chiang’, ‘The Sun Makers’, ‘The Ribos Operation’, etc etc…) for fans to enjoy and wallow in the wonderful things they do.

Terrance Dicks: “Bob Holmes was one of the finest writers to work on Who we worked together since my earliest days on the show. He was a nice, though sometimes prickly man, with a keen and sometimes mordant sense of humour, and a love of gruesomeness. He’s a great loss.”

Jon Thurley (Holmes’ agent): “Personally Bob was quiet, self-effacing, very likeable, with a dry sense of humour who never used two words where one would do. We used to meet periodically for one of the ferocious curries he liked so much at one of the many curry houses he ferretted out over the years.”

Eric Saward: “Socially Bob was great fun, full of life and energy, and by the evening, usually full of wine as well.”

Roger Marshall: “Bob Holmes and I were great mates and I still miss him. Our last meeting was at a friend’s flat. This friend was trying to get a group of like-minded thriller writers together to contribute to a series. Bob, who had a marvellously wry sense of humour, didn’t rate its chances any higher than I did. We left together, went strolling around a few bookshops. We parted at some tube station, with the promise that ‘we must meet more often’. I never saw him again.

“His wife, Pat, said he was the nicest human being she ever met. Not a bad obituary. Lots of shitty, phoney people on television. Bob was neither. He was a gent!”

Graham Williams [DWB 38]: “I only hope that wherever he is now the fees get paid quicker and the phone never stops ringing. I’m sure that’ll be the way of it even over there, they’ll know a good thing when they see it…”

Eric Saward was to rewrite the final two-thirds of the penultimate episode and the whole of the last, sticking to Holmes’ basic plan. Elements lost were that the Valeyard and the Doctor were meant to be similar in appearance, so much so that Mel believes them to be brothers. The validity of the three segments of the trial were also much more in doubt, as depicted by the intended appearance of Popplewick’s office: a room from Vervoid’s spacecraft redressed with Victorian trappings. A synopsis of Saward’s version of episode fourteen appears in Skaro 6.

Of course, Saward withdrew that episode in a flurry of stress, panic and publicity, and says he would also have liked to “have withdrawn the penultimate as well, but Bob had been originally commissioned to write it, therefore it had his name on.”

The televised version bears a few of Holmes’ trademarks, with some witty and apparently typical, dialogue ["I would point out that much of the Railyard's so-called evidence was a farago of distortion which would have had Ananias, Baron Munchhausen, and every other famous liar blushing down to their very toenails"], though, like ‘The Mysterious Planet’, it’s impossible to say how much of the script was Holmes’. The sequences in the Matrix are also just as effective and doomladen as their counterparts in ‘The Deadly Assassin’. Popplewick appears to be more Saward than Holmes (he was to have been a weasly, more Dickensian individual), and wasn’t originally a disguised Valeyard.

It pains me to admit it but Pip and Jane Baker’s version of episode fourteen isn’t bad. Holmes/Saward’s first half may explode into the tangle of confusion the Bakers reckon constitutes a good story, and leave more loose ends than they resolve, but it’s a reasonable effort when you consider they had four days to finish off a story they’d had no involvement with, and without any idea of the original intentions for that final episode. And at least Glitz’s fine character comes off better that it would in ‘Dragonfire’.

‘The Trial of a Time Lord’ Part Thirteen was Robert Holmes’ last work for television. An episode of Bergerac, ‘Winner Takes All’, written by Holmes, was transmitted on 10th January 1987, but it had been held over from the previous season in 1985.

Behind you!Not much funny happens to you when most of your life is spent in solitary confinement staring at a typewriter. Not funny-funny things, anyway. Statistically, I suppose writers must cop their fair share of ordinary funny things like train accidents and boilers going bang in the night.

I once dropped a coal-hod containing half a hundredweight of Phurnacite on my foot. As the steel rim splintered into the metatarsal that controls my big toe I remember screaming, “Good gracious! That’s funny.”

Later that day I was talking to Louis Marks … I mentioned the appalling agony I was suffering and Louis, who is a doctor, took immediate clinical control. “Take a needle in a pair of pliers,’ he advised, ‘and heat it until it’s incandescent. Then drive it through the toe-nail.”

Louis is one of the funniest chaps I know, as well as being a doctor of philosophy.

Robert Holmes, ‘A Life of Hammer and Tongs’ (The Doctor Who File)

WITH THANKS TO: Terrance Dicks, Roger Marshall, John Nathan-Turner, Andrew Pixley, Nigel Robinson, Eric Saward, Jon M Thurley; and Alun Harris and Jeremy Bentham for the encouragement.REFERENCES: Bob Holmes interview [DWM 100] and article [The Doctor Who File], Eric Saward interviews [DWM 94; DWB 57/58, 106/107], Anthony Read interview [DWM 118], John Nathan-Turner interview [DWM 164], ‘Timeslip’ [Starburst 90], ‘The Guest of Madam Guillotine’ [Skaro 6], ‘The Fact of Fiction’ [Time Screen 5], ‘The Death of Yesterday’ [DWB 97/98], various DWM Archives.

Tags: ,