The Time Travellers

The First Doctor, Ian, Barbara, and Susan is not a group that would normally entice me to pick up a book of this length (though First Doctor stories frequently surprise me, and I love "The Aztecs"). Nevertheless, this was a gripping, well-crafted book, though quite different from the Lance Parkin one I just read.

Speaking of "The Aztecs," much of the context of the book depends on what the Doctor told Barbara in that TV story, about not trying to change history. While I was a bit annoyed the book strove to show the Doctor was then not telling the whole truth, in the end the approach made sense. The mechanics of time travel have always discombobulated me, but here it seems a bit more straightforward: 'Where we are now is all that matters.' I finally get an explanation of the grandfather paradox, which is not just the name of a character in The Ancestor Cell (though it occurred to me the Doctor might personify a "grandfather paradox," us having known he was a grandfather since 1963 but having no hint as to how that happened, other than the oblique comment in "Fear Her"). With pages and pages on lodestones, hoops, duplicates, focal lengths, and so on, my response to the Doctor's 'You've puzzled it out, of course?' would have been, probably, "Uh . . . no."

There is something very old-fashioned and atmospheric about the story, very true to the First Doctor's era. Guerrier writes all of the principals convincingly. I have a soft spot for Ian, who always seemed so awe-inspiringly heroic and noble, yet down-to-earth, and the relationship with Barbara is rendered sensitively and deliberately. The opening is a typical Doctor Who fakeout, though at the time it made me angry as I wanted this destiny for Ian and Barbara (the end turned the tables, and despite the general sombreness of the story, it was nice that it ended on a happy note). The atmosphere of a wartime Canary Wharf and Little Britain was chillingly but believably created, feeling a bit like 1984.

The plot was extremely involved, and it must have taken massive amounts of effort to conceive it (and revise it!). The pacing was such that it built to its climaxes quite well, making it difficult to put down in places (though the changes in POV to Abi Ali & co toward the beginning I found quite confusing). There was a wonderful, "Resurrection of the Daleks"-like reversal from Griffiths (which I didn't see coming but should have!), but strangely for the character Bamford I kept seeing the alternate universe Liz Shaw from Inferno (!). I loved the idea of the Andrewses who kept showing up (and later, getting shot in such a cheerful manner). I also shuddered in terror and delight as St Pauls was blown up! I didn't quite understand what the deal was with Susan and Griffiths, nor why he had some kind of implied relationship with Ali, but these are niggling concerns.

I've so far (at least attempted) to write five of the Doctors, but the two I'm not sure I'd ever approach writing would be Three and One. I think the First Doctor is a tricky one, especially as the writer can't give much away. I think he's captured well in the book, bluffing his way through stalemates, pickpocketing, acting helpless when it suits him, being a rogue, and even: 'Oh,' he said. 'It's a stick-shift.' 'That doesn't present a challenge to me,' said the Doctor. Though I wouldn't say the book had the quotable cleverness of, say, the last Who book I read, or Justin Richards at his best, its moments of humor shone through the overall grimness: 'You screwed up, right?' The Doctor blinked at her. 'Me, no,' he said, sternly. 'I never "screw up".'

It's a book I enjoyed and felt satisfied when finishing it, and for a first novel it's quite an achievement.