The Massacre

“Even after all this time he cannot understand” 

Un autre épisode endommagé, qui avec son Docteur seul et amer conclut enfin un cycle atrocement sanglant. Mais pour le coup c’est vraiment la performance finale de William Hartnell qui porte son intrigue. 

En effet c’est un récit de comment l’Histoire broie des vies et les gens sont impuissants. Mais le pauvre Steven est tellement passif et réduit à un cache-cache fastidieux dans Paris qu’il se noie juste dans un ensemble de scènes historiques aléatoires. 

En fait les deux grands récits de The Massacre se parasitent l’un l’autre, et Steven est tout le temps coincé entre les deux. 

Mais si c’est déjà très révélateur d’une époque qui ne sait plus ce qu’elle veut dire, c’est aussi représentatif d’un personnage qui n’en a jamais été un.

“Kings are recognised only by the power they wield.”

Seems I might be alone in this, but it’s really not for me this one. A dark, gritty and rather depressing set of episodes set in 1500s France. It’s bleak and really delves into the political standings of the era, and while I feel I have learned something of the time period, I found the story itself to be incredible boring.

Perhaps not helped by the entire story being missing, with only the reconstruction to view. It’s a lot of dialogue, a lot of slow paced scenes, and a whole host of characters that I found rather hard to keep up with it all.

Peter Purves does a good job, being the main focus of the story around the other cast side characters. While Hartnell’s role as the Abbot is a fun idea, but doesn’t really actually mean much to the story, and without being able to see the performance, it’s hard to gauge really what was different here. Though, the ending with Hartnell’s little speech is brilliant, and warm.

I can see why people enjoy this, but just didn’t really work for me. Too slow, and really not what I look for in compelling Doctor Who episodes.

The Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve: 7.4/10 - This serial was very fun, albeit slightly confusing. I thought part one was a great set up with the characters all being interesting. Part two and onwards felt packed full of different characters and I sometimes couldn’t tell who was on which side as the backgrounds all seemed very similar which made it feel like it was the same set over and over. Steven was definitely the highlight here with he and Anne being a great partnership. The Doctor being absent for the majority of the serial felt right for this story and paved the way for Steven to become more independent. The Abbot of Amboise was a character that didn’t have much to do and that I wish got more screen time.

I found Massacre a little pedestrian in the most part, pure historicals are often not quite as fun as a standard story. I'm always amazed how many Doctor Who plots revolve around the Doctor having a doppelganger or the Doctor disguising himself in some way.

The last 10 minutes of this story beat the rest in terms of quality easily. Just as you think Steven is about to storm out in a fit of moral outrage, a new character joins the team. We were made to think about the consequences of death encountered on The Doctor's travels, the responsibilities of time travelers and look back nostalgically at The Doctor's former companions.

I am starting to feel a bit sorry for Hartnell when he misremembers Susan as "Sue" and has his same old problem with Chesterton/"Chetterton".

A pretty excellent historical that easily could be one of the Doctor's best were it not for the somewhat awkward content around the Doctor being missing for one of the episodes. It is understandable given the brutal production scheduling of this era, but the effect on The Massacre of St Bartholomew's Eve exists just the same.

Still, it is an interesting story with good actors, and the lack of Hartnell does allow Steven's character to shine a little bit. There is some very dark and ponderous material to this story that I really appreciate. It is probably one of my more favourite of First Doctor stories I have encountered so far. I thought the historical content was really well done (especially the costumes and sets) while I also was really moved by the final episode, which really pushed Doctor Who in this darker direction.

It's an interesting time period of the show where they were really experimenting with this more brutal and harsh content the classic series would never really revisit, but I don't think it was ever a bad take on Doctor Who. It's serious and ponderous, but most importantly, stories like Massacre really worked, in my opinion, and stand out nicely. Even Dodo's appearance at the end works well at blunting the severity of the story a bit, which I think works well to wrap things up on an at least somewhat helpful not. A good ending to a good story, one sadly underrated, likely due to the lost episodes.

The perfect doctor who story amazing moments AMAZING script amazing cast amazing monologue and I feel timeline wise this is all built up for Steven it’s huge for his character I love it I do wish he actually left though at the end I feel it was a perfect exit and lead into the best lost moment of the show being the doctors monologue on his past

A surprisingly strong historical tale! Combining drama with character and just a drop of main character development. Leading to a story that’s well worth your time.

The Doctor and Steven land in Paris, 1572. Where conflict between the Catholics and Huguenots is driving the country towards breaking point. They arrive in the calm before the storm, before they get split up.

This episode is one of the currently lost episodes in season 3. Your options for watching it are limited. Considering the ending section of this story, it would be a shame to read this. It is very performance heavy. That leaves you with either the Narrated Soundtrack, or the Loose Cannon Reconstruction. In this case, the Reconstruction is very visually solid, so I would take that route. Anyway, on to the review:

Let’s talk about our main characters first. For the Doctor and Steven, this is the story that confirms how the dynamics have changed. From the moment Katarina got shot out of an airlock a few episodes back, the pressure was put on their companionship. The Doctor’s victory speech at the end of Daleks’ Master Plan dealt the finishing blow: It’s not about the fun anymore.

In audio, we’ve continued this strain on the relationship. While the Doctor and Steven trust each other, they can’t get used to their new 2 person dynamic. Especially since they have some big moral differences and traumatic events behind them. There is a constant distance. They try to keep up a superficial relationship, but it only leads to constant insults.

It's fundamentally broken: The Doctor can’t trust that Steven keeps up with his plans and ideas, while Steven can’t trust on the Doctor to do the right thing.

Why do I bring all this up here? Because this story makes them give up. This story is Steven once again not being involved in the Doctor’s ideas. He disappears after episodes 1 and only returns in episode 4. At the same time, when he finally shows up, he immediately flees for the tardis and leaves a young woman behind. Nothing has changed.

This makes Steven give up on him and leave. Leading to the pretty famous “They’re all gone” speech. The beauty of this speech is not in the incredible vulnerability he shows, but in the fact that he still completely misses the point. It isn’t about the companions and that they couldn’t understand him. It’s about them expecting more from the Doctor, and him not willing to live up to it. He is not a hero and he doesn’t think he can be. He considers giving up and returning home, but convinces himself he can’t do that. So what does that make him? Who is the Doctor?

It's a beautiful, beautiful piece that was sorely needed. After these last few stories, the Doctor begins to look like a bad guy. Leaving people behind without a care or consideration. This speech turn the black outline into morally grey. It’s not malice, it’s fear and misunderstanding of himself. A man who always chooses the flight response when it comes to fight or flight, because he cannot bear the weight of a fight. If you start fighting, when does the fighting ever stop?

After almost 60 years, we probably start to understand. The Doctor is right. The companions couldn’t understand the massive will it takes to start a never-ending fight. How many incarnations have begged for a break? An end to the fighting? That starts here. This Doctor has gained a morality in the last two seasons. He knows good from bad, he knows there are things in the universe worth protecting. He just isn’t ready to be the protector that others want him to be.

Let’s stop right there for now. Otherwise I’ll run out of material for my character retrospective. Just know that these 10 minutes might already be the most important event that happens in this entire season. But I should probably start talking about the other 90 as well.

I’ve mentioned before that the most important part of a dramatic historical is making us care about the characters it present. This story mostly succeeds on that front. An interesting change is that, without the Doctor, Steven becomes a very central part of the drama as well. He’s not some bystander or observer of history, he’s completely engulfed between the two factions.

Other members of those factions, sadly, aren’t as interesting. Maybe it would’ve helped if we had some sliver of footage, but that’s speculation. The problem is that there are probably too many people around. We have 14 important named characters to keep track of, and that can be too many at times. Their interpersonal relations become a bit muddled at times. Still, they do have their moments. And while I can’t remember all their names, I can remember most of the personalities.

Besides that, it still wasn’t entirely clear to me how the Massacre actually came to be. For example, it was pretty clear the queen was involved, but I don’t know in what way or exactly why. I wish some of the interpersonal banter had a bit more historical meat to it, so the main event became a bit more “looming”.

But even with these small trip-ups there’s plenty to love here. The introductory scenes in the bar are great character work and know how to set the scene for the entire city of Paris. Great use of location. There are also some really memorable scenes. Especially when Steven flees from a mob, which lands even though we have no footage. The overall story also lands completely. While details might be missing here and there, the overall conflict and reasons for conflict are pretty clear. The important parts hit.

Having said that, I would have loved those details. I think they would have raised the story to a higher level. Why does the priest look like the Doctor? Where was the Doctor anyway? Where is Preslin, the man who was with the Doctor? Add to that the earlier questions about the exact nature of the massacre, and I feel like this story could have had a tad more meat on its bones. It certainly had the time to answer these questions.

Other than that, we have a new companion to talk about. Throughout the story Steven is accompanied by a girl named Anne Chaplet, who eventually gets left behind in the Massacre. She survives, however, and we meet her great great great great granddaughter Dodo Chaplet.

What’s interesting about Dodo is that we know nothing about her. We know her name and she looks like Susan. That’s it. No year, no likes, dislikes, personality, anything. You can take this 2 ways. Either it’s bad because she should’ve been presented more carefully, or she was presented this way for a reason.

Dodo is the most random way we’ve aquired a companion. She stomps into the police box and is kidnapped shortly after. The Doctor mentions how she looks like Susan and has a smile on his face. Dodo doesn’t seem to care about any of it.

I think the Doctor sees Dodo as a way to recapture his glory days. His days of a grandfatherly traveller. A way to grab towards something familiar. It does not matter who Dodo is. It only matters what she reminds him of. A potential tool for better travels. Let’s see how this turns out in the long run.

Steven’s reason for returning is less solid. He did not know about Dodo, but he joined after he saw officers heading towards the Tardis. Apparently some part of him still cares the Doctor, but details are vague. I hope future stories go into this reason for return some more. For now, we have a new party of three, consisting of 2 dysfunctional individuals, a random third person and a lot of room for moral discussions. I can’t wait to see where it goes.

“The Massacre” is, apparently, a tale of two halves. That kind of surprised me. Those last 10 minutes do a lot and are beautiful, but you can’t judge a story purely on that. Besides it stands a well crafted and well realized world with its own characters and events. Some of those characters and events could use more focus, but what’s there is still great. This makes for an overall solid adventure which could lead to all kinds of things in the future. An absolute classic.

Probably one of the most watchable black-and-white Who historicals, with some good tension and a shocking finale. It does feel like there's some missing potential here, though. The plot element of the Abbott looking like the Doctor is a great gimmick in theory but doesn't really come into play much, and in the end you're kinda led to wonder why they did it at all.

The drama in this serial's final episode is particularly compelling, with Steven's outrage at the Doctor's inaction during the massacre. You get a rare peek at Hartnell's Doctor as a distant alien determined not to interfere with history, as a resigned traveler who's seen too much and lost too much – and the way it clashes with Steven's good-hearted and very human instincts to stop the massacre and save Anne. It's great, dramatic character work... for all of five minutes before Steven comes rushing back into the TARDIS having seemingly stopped caring, and then you're led once again to wonder why they even bothered.

Still, though, three stars for the good bits.

The Massacre is the third and final script by John Lucarotti. It’s fair to say that my relationship with Lucarotti’s writing has been a little rough. I rather dislike Marco Polo but I adore The Aztecs. So where does The Massacre of St Bartholomew’s Eve fit? Somewhere in between is the rather simplistic and boring answer. Although I didn’t have as many problems with it as I do with Marco Polo, I didn’t love it as much as The Aztecs either. Of course, the fact that Donald Tosh extensively rewrote the serial needs to be taken into consideration here (I don’t remember being overly enamoured with Lucarotti’s novelisation of the story which, apparently, returns the story to a earlier draft than the version which ultimately made it to screen, but it has been many, many years since I read it).

I think both this story and Marco Polo suffer from a lack of visuals, The Massacre even more so as we don’t even have a bunch of telesnaps recovered from the director’s attic. As far as I’m aware there are no more than about 10 photos from the whole production – and nothing showing a key aspect of the story: Hartnell as the Abbot of Amboise.

Consequently, it is a little tricky to follow the political machinations of the rather large cast and I must admit to being lost a couple of times as to who was speaking to whom. There is Nichola Muss, Gaston and Anne Chaplet; Admiral de Coligny, Catherine de Medici, King Charles IX, Marshal Tavannes, Simon Duvall, Roger Colbert, Teligny and Charles Preslin, not to mention sundry unnamed characters, Steven and both the Doctor and his doppelganger, the Abbot of Amboise. This, to me, seems like a massive cast for an average Doctor Who story – and with most of them being fairly similar sounding, it makes an audio only story a bit difficult to keep track of.

However, when making a concerted effort to pay attention and follow the plot, a fascinating and quite troubling plot is revealed.

Central to this story is Steven. This is basically a Doctor-lite story, 40 odd years before the new series invented the concept. Of course, prior to this story there had been Doctor-less episodes – two parts of The Keys of Marinus for example – but this is the first time the Doctor has frankly had nothing whatsoever to do with the main outcomes of the story. The Doctor disappears during part one, War of God (after some delightful interplay with Preslin), and doesn’t reappear until part four, Bell of Doom. When he does return he berates Steven for causing trouble (none of which was Steven’s fault) and bundles him into the TARDIS for further adventures in time and space.

Understandably, Steven is livid with the Doctor – principally for leaving Anne Chaplet to her, probably bloody, fate, but also, I think, for leaving him in the lurch with no explanation, no contact or reassurance and no apology!

Steven is central to the entire story, caught between the Protestants and Catholics and not really understanding any of the issues causing the tension. He protects Anne, not because he believes the Catholics are evil but because it’s the right thing to do for a vulnerable person. He spends time at the Admiral’s house not because he believes in the Huegenot cause but because Nicholas is the only person willing to offer him hospitality.

The trauma that Steven is put through is tangible. The confusion he feels when he discovers that the Abbot looks like the Doctor is shared by the viewer. Is it the Doctor? If it is, why is he doing it and why hasn’t he told Steven?  The possibility that this is the Doctor with some grand unknowable plan recalls the manipulative Seventh Doctor, particularly the version portrayed in the New Adventures, or the way the Second Doctor manipulates Jamie in The Evil of the Daleks. It is shocking to even contemplate the possibility that the Doctor is masquerading as the Abbot and leaving Steven to fend for himself in a time and place he cannot hope to understand. When it seems that the Doctor has been murdered in the street and Steven is pursued by a vicious mob, the viewer shares his utter hopelessness. Anne’s suggestion of returning to England brings home the stark reality of what would happen to the Doctor’s companions (particularly ones who don’t even have a fellow companion with them) if the Doctor were to actually die and leave them stranded in a time and place they didn’t belong.

Aside from the focus on Steven, the other unusual aspect of this serial is its subject matter. I can guarantee most Doctor Who fans only know about this rather obscure event in history because of the series. It’s not a historical time or place that I have ever come across in any other part of my life – not museums, television, books or even the wonderful Horrible Histories. That said, though, having listened to this serial a few times, I don’t actually think my knowledge of it is any greater. I know that there was religious tension between the Catholics and Protestants (or Huegenots). I know that Louis IX was on the throne but his mother, Catherine de Medici had influence over him. I know there was a marriage between a Protestant Prince, Henry, and a Catholic Princess in a futile, and probably insincere, attempt to bring peace to the two factions. I know that the Catholics attempted to assassinate Admiral de Coligny. I know that there was a terrible massacre of Protestants around the time of the festival of St Bartholomew’s Day. What I don’t know is what came before or after. I don’t know why there was this specific tension. I don’t know what the result of the marriage was or of the massacre itself. Of course, what this should make me do is go and find out. I think the difference here is that, with most historical periods visited in Doctor Who, we already have a basic understanding of the period and the players. Whether its Rome burning while Nero fiddled or Vikings raiding Britain or Cortez wiping out the Aztecs, these are times and places that are more familiar than 16th century France. Without any prior knowledge the viewer (listener) has to pay attention to every single line of dialogue to build up a picture of what is going on. This puts us in exactly the same position as Steven and that is a very good, and yet – to some extent – unsettling thing.

In terms of firsts for Doctor Who, here we have the first example of a doppelganger of the Doctor. Yes, I know previous to this we had the robot Doctor created by the Daleks in The Chase, but, one – that was a robot specifically designed to look like the Doctor; and two – it looked nothing like the Doctor! This is the first instance of another person who just happens to look like the Doctor (something that would be revisited from time to time, most notably in The Enemy of the World). Of course, this other person is a villain (in so much as any of the characters in this story are villains) but it allows Hartnell to play a very different character to the Doctor – particularly the softer, more playful character the Doctor had become by the third season. Much has been made of the fact that Hartnell doesn’t fluff his lines as the Abbot, but then the suggestion that the ‘Billy-fluff’ was an affectation is countered by the fact that in the historical stories, a clear favourite of Hartnell, he rarely fluffed his lines anyway.

That said, though, the Abbot is hardly in the story and serves more as a plot device to increase the level of jeopardy for Steven. Hartnell was on holiday for episode 2 anyway, so we only really see the Abbot a bit in part one and then part 3 before he is murdered. It’s isn’t the all encompassing performance that Troughton would give us as Salamander or even Tom Baker as Meglos.

And this is the reason why, unlike the Doctor’s non-involvement in Marco Polo his non-involvement in The Massacre is vital to the plot – indeed is the plot. Steven’s confusion, despair and ultimate anger because of how the Doctor behaves in this story and the presence of the Abbot is central to the entire story.

The Massacre is an unusual story and I can’t quite decide how much I like it. I adore the fact that Steven is pushed front and centre for the entire story, but do miss the Doctor’s contribution to events a little. The huge cast of characters can be confusing (especially on audio) but with a bit of concentration it isn’t beyond me to keep up. The main criticism I would have is that there is an awful lot of standing around and talking as characters divulge the plot with not a huge amount of action in between. With very similar sounding characters, that does make it a little uninvolving from time to time but I think the uniqueness of the serial balances this out and means I look forward to revisiting the story at some point in the future. I’m off now, to find out more about the Massacre of St Bartholomew’s Eve so I can properly understand what on earth was going on.

I haven’t commented on Dodo’s introduction. I don’t really know what to say. It’s so at odds with the rest of the story and causes Steven’s anger to dissipate almost instantaneously that I can’t take it seriously. Add to that the fact that Jackie Lane’s accent is utterly bizarre (especially if it is supposed to be Wimbledon Common she’s stumbled in from) and the ridiculous suggestion that she could be some distant relative of Anne and I don’t really want to deign the idea with my thoughts – oh look, I just have! I think I’ll save commenting on Dodo till we reach a full story with her in.