Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!acf4!percus
From: percus@acf4.UUCP (Allon G. Percus)
Newsgroups: net.tv.drwho
Subject: Re: To the defense of Davison
Message-ID: <5020102@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Dec-85 12:13:00 EST
Article-I.D.: acf4.5020102
Posted: Sat Dec 21 12:13:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jan-86 07:58:59 EST
References: <327@spock.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 70

* FLAME ON *

> 	To judge Davison by the quality of his adventures and scripts is
> silly.  All the Doctors have had brilliant as well as horrendous
> stories, and Tom Baker never "saved" a story: He only stole them.

I think your primary error is thinking that Davison as an actor is
regarded by most with the same dislike as Davison as The Doctor.
I doubt anyone (at least anyone on the net) would go so far as to think
that the poor qualities of many of the Davison stories reflect on
Davison's "poor acting."

Also, you would never know if Tom Baker saved a story.  For all I know,
some the best Baker stories may have been terrible to start with,
but were extensively rewritten by Baker until they were good
(for example, most of "City of Death" was written by Tom Baker.
I wonder how it would have been in the Douglas Adams original
version -- also, "Shada" was basically all written by Tom Baker).

> ...[Davison] could also not change
> the scripts, which often saw the Doctor as a secondary or even a minor
> character, and which betrayed a singular lack of interest in the Doctor.
> (At Panopticon VI, Davison said in all his time, he was only allowed to
> change one scene: the start of Time Flight, which in its original form
> was inappropriate.)

I'd say that this was Davison's fault.  Contrast this to when Tom Baker
was working under John Nathan-Turner.  Baker wasn't "allowed" to change
any scritpts either (such was JN-T's way of "working"), but he did anyway,
through the use of threats if necessary.  Davison could have similarly
said "You have a choice: either I extensively change this, or I do not
renew my contract for next season," and then compromised half-way at
partially changing some things.

> ...This is vastly different from the Baker era, in which
> Baker, Liz Sladen, Ian Marter, and Lalla Ward have all confessed they
> vastly rewrote scripts.

Quite true, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

> 	In my opinion, Davison was, from an acting standpoint, impeccable. 

I do not think that this can even be debated.

> 	I will always maintain that Davison was a better actor than
> Baker, at least in this role, but Baker was the better Doctor.

Same here.

> ...(Having
> seen Baker in other roles, I can also testify that he's quite capable of
> a stunning performance, too.)

Well, that's debateable, especially in The Hound of the Baskervilles.

* FLAME OFF *


           .
        -------
        |-----|             A. G. Percus
        |II II|      (ARPA) percus@acf4
        |II II|       (NYU) percus.acf4
        |II II|      (UUCP) ...{allegra!ihnp4!seismo}!cmcl2!acf4!percus
        |II II|
        -------

     "These lords of yours -- how long have they ruled over you?"
     "Forever."
     "Really -- as long as that.  Well, that's a long time..."