It is no secret to those who know me that Robert Shearman is my favourite Doctor Who writer of all time. Chimes of Midnight is probably my favourite Doctor Who story of any medium. Deadline is probably my favourite Big Finish script. Even Scherzo and Dalek (TV), my two lowest rated Shearman stories, I gave 4.5 stars to; with Dalek (TV) being one that I could arguably bump up to 5 stars. I feel like Shearman understands the show in ways few others do, and he is incredibly skilled as a storyteller, especially in his use of tone.

So of course, I was excited for the Target novelisation. And when I first read it a few years ago, I enjoyed it but didn't love it.

For its 20th anniversary, I rewatched Dalek (TV) and loved it, giving it aforementioned 4.5 stars. My only criticisms being that Adam Mitchell isn't a good character and wastes time and space; and that I wish Rose felt more guilt for her actions leading to the deaths of so many. After watching this episode and adoring it, I decided I'd give the novel another shake to see if I'd enjoy it more this time around, especially with the episode it's adapting still in my mind.

This is my least favourite Shearman by a large margin, and it frustrates me to no end that it is because so many of his best qualities shine throughout.

Let me start with the positives: this is an incredible read. As prose, it's easily a 4-4.5 star. The way that Shearman writes is beautiful, compelling and accessible. The story flows from one word to the next with ease, and I felt it was definitely a bit of a page turner. I also feel like that there two significant changes both work: Goddard becoming an FBI agent gives her so much more depth, and it makes her betrayal of Van Statten feel more fleshed out and real; and the Van Statten's fate not only adds a karmic justice, but also makes the titular Dalek feel more calculating, and cruel. To cause this fate not through physical violence or death, but purely psychologically hurting Van Statten. It's very Whittaker in the Dalek portrayal, and very Shearman in the psychological sense.

I will be talking more about the backstories in a moment, but there are two that stand out: the first and the last. The first is just a very good short story with great prose and character insights. The latter.... It's just spectacular, and the insight it gives into the Dalek's past is just absolutely stellar.

But here we get to the crux of the issue I have with this adaptation: there are only 2 significant changes to the narrative itself, and there are multiple new backstories with only one that truly gives me new insight into the story, with the other one I praised being great in and of itself, but in the context of Dalek the story? Why do I care? It didn't make me feel for the torturer more, nor did it make me feel for his death. I just thought it was a nice, unrelated short story that Shearman had glued into his Dalek novelisation.

For me, these backstories are just distracting. They interrupt the flow of the narrative and no matter how well written they are, it just makes the story feel bloated as they don't really make me feel more invested in the characters they're about, with exception of the final backstory character, and to an extent Goddard.

I also feel like because the rest of the book is a fairly straight adaptation and so much time is spent on these side characters, 9 and Rose almost feel sidelined in their own story... And it really does harm it for me. There are a few great small moments where added depth is given to both, but the breakneck pace at which the normal adaptation happens while the backstories get fleshed out and more time to breathe makes it feel like Shearman almost wasn't too interested in actually doing Dalek. It genuinely feels almost bizarre having the main characters rush along while side ones get so much focus.

And that's the other issue: the pacing. The start and end (especially the end) feel rushed, and scenes from the TV episode really are just in here almost verbatim with only minor changes for the most part, and we move on from them super quickly. But again, the backstories get very long, very dedicated sections. And it just emphasises the problem of them being distracting from the narrative.

2.5 may feel harsh when I loved the writing so much, but it's what I feel in my heart. Because while I think this is an amazing book, I don't think it's a good adaptation. I wish it fleshed out the actual scenes of the episode, instead of brushing past them. I wish it tied the backstories more into the narrative. I wish the backstories weren't given almost entirely to characters who die and we don't care about.

It's just a frustrating book because I know Shearman can do better! He has before, multiple times! He hopefully will come October with his next adaptations! Hell, he has in this very own book at points. But in my heart of hearts, I feel this is just a let down. Maybe it could one day be a 3 for me, but with how much it annoys me in the way it's done, I doubt it.

What a shame.