Practical Discussion of Sherlockian roots of Doctor Who: With Some Observations on "The Talons of Weng-Chiang" and other 'crossover' works: Part One - Doctor [W]holmes??

The link between Sherlock Holmes and the Doctor can be seen most clearly in the actors who have played the part. Six 'Doctors' have also played "the Great Detective"; most famously Peter Cushing, the movie Doctor, in both Hammer's "Hound of the Baskervilles" and in the BBC's 16 part "Sherlock Holmes" television series in 1968; Tom Baker, the Fourth Doctor, who played the role for the BBC's 1982 "Hound of the Baskervilles", which reunited him with Terrance Dicks and Barry Letts, and on stage; and current incumbent, Peter Capaldi, in an Alexei Sayle sketch. The sextet is completed by the stand-in Doctors, David Banks (in rep in 1970's), Richard Hurdnall (BBC Radio's 1959 "Sign of Four" - surprisingly good !), and 'Shalka' Doctor, Richard E. Grant who played Holmes in a drama documentary about Conan Doyle  [he has also played Stapleton, Mycroft, and even ACD], whilst referring to his Doctor as 'Sherlock Holmes in space'.
 
Even Jeremy Brett, thought by many, including myself, to have been the TV Holmes of his generation, was considered when the part of the Seventh Doctor was being cast, without having to undertake a screen test, but turned it down to continue playing Holmes. [Even recent Holmes Jonny Lee Miller's first screen credit was Fifth Doctor adventure 'Kinda'] But what is the connection between these seemingly unconnected characters ?

Firstly, despite the Doctor being from Gallifrey in the constellation of Kasterborus, there is a quintessential Victorian Englishness about him, both in his dress (most extremely in "Talons of Weng Chiang") and in his actions, in particular his supporting of female companions. He also seems to spend an inordinate amount of time on Earth, in particular England, with a whole universe to explore, he always seems to end up in good old Blighty. Sherlock, is himself, the perfect Victorian English gentlemen helping the many young girls who come to consult him over lost fiances, unusual legacies, and speckled bands.

This brings me on to a second point, both are asexual characters with large gay and lesbian followings. The Doctor has travelled with no less than more than thirty lovely young girls in the TARDIS, and with the exception of Grace, a kiss of delight on the return of his memory, and Rose, the exception to the rule, has in the main not shown feelings towards them other than that of a concerned travelling companion. Sherlock was also an asexual man, preferring the company of his good friend, Watson, in a close but not homosexual relationship. He left the flirting with clients to Watson, whose knowledge of women stretched three continents. The accusation of love towards Irene Adler is unfounded, he had only supreme respect for the woman, in the same way, the Sixth Doctor expresses respect for "The Terrible Zodin"

Thirdly, Sherlock Holmes is one of literature's most well-known eccentrics, only just surpassed by his cousin on his father's side, Professor George Edward Challenger. The Doctor is also an eccentric, with his strange musical talents (recorder and spoons), celery adorned lapel, bags of jelly babies, and seemingly bottomless pockets, which contain all manner of useless items. This link has leant many people to label the Fourth Doctor as the Sherlockian Doctor, as he was the most obvious eccentric. However, I would argue that the Fourth Doctor is too loveable an eccentric, and the title of most Sherlockian Doctor should be given elsewhere, but more of this later.

Fourthly, there is the importance of companions. In his adventures through time and space, the Doctor has been joined by over forty travelling companions, Sherlock however, has been joined for fifty-five of his sixty canonical adventures by the trusty, Watson. The companion's role is to stand in for the reader or watcher, and constantly question what the Doctor is doing, in order that the reader or watcher understands what is happening. Jo Grant was a prime example of this, acting in a Watsonesque manner towards the Third Doctor, neither she, Watson or the Doctor's other companions were imbeciles, all were of average intelligence, but saddled with an eccentric genius for a companion.

On a more flippant note, both characters had at least one Great Hiatus, when they were feared dead, but whilst Sherlock was thought dead for three years, the Doctor returned safe and well (for the first time), a mere eighteen months later. Obviously, Michael Grade was easier to defeat than the remnants of Moriarty’s criminal organisation. [However, I write during another hiatus, this time for a year]

Finally, both are heroes in the old-fashioned sense, going out and righting wrongs, good triumphing over evil. Both characters are heroes of their time, or I suppose in the Doctor’s case, of all time. They stand together with others such as James Bond in the public consciousness.

However, every hero needs a villain. Peter Haining in his 1983 book "Doctor Who: A Celebration" states that "the Doctor and his sworn enemy the Master are the Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty of our times". He goes on to state that the Master is "a man of similar background, equal intelligence and ingenuity" to the Doctor, as is Moriarty to Holmes. Whilst agreeing with this latter statement, that Holmes and Moriarty are alike, just on different sides of the good/evil divide. Even Colin Baker and “Doctor Who” producers Barry Letts and John Nathan-Turner have identified the Master as a Moriarty to the Doctor's Holmes. However, this comparison is flawed. Moriarty only appears in person in one story, and is only definitely behind one other, whereas the Master has faced the Doctor over thirty times in the course of 53 years. Moriarty as any good Sherlockian knows controls the operation, with his agents undertaking the day to day business of his criminal organisation, and none are traced back to him, until Mr. Sherlock Holmes enters the fray. Moriarty is closer in character to the Black Guardian, a largely unseen presence who uses others, firstly the Shadow, and then Turlough, in his attempts to defeat the hero, the Doctor.

Much is made of the three Reichenbach incidents in “The Deadly Assassin”, “Logopolis” and the “Doctor Who” television movie. The strongest of these is “Logopolis”, where the Doctor regenerates following his tussle with the Master on a giant radio mast, as some Sherlockians claim that Sherlock was not the man he was, on his return from his explorations as Sigerson. The only other Moriarty-like performance by the Master is in “Mind of Evil”, when he also sits at the centre of a web of criminal intrigue, and at the end taunts the hero in a similar way to his literary counterpart at the end of “The Valley of Fear”. Having cleared up what I view as an annoying misconception, I will move onto the twelve Doctors, to find a candidate for most Sherlockian Doctor.

The First Doctor, I can say little of, finding his character so objectionable that I am unable to watch him. His dress is Victorian in style, and he does appear eccentric and objectionable, which means he may run the Sixth and Twelfth Doctors close on that aspect. The Second Doctor is even more eccentric than his predecessor, and looks like Holmes may have done in one of his down-and-out disguises. He also shows detective skills in his methodical piecing together of apparently unconnected clues in “The Faceless Ones”, “The Evil of the Daleks” and “The Tomb of the Cybermen”.

The appearance of the Third Doctor is when Sherlockian references begin to abound. The Doctor’s struggle with the Master, his “Moriarty” (see above) which takes place within UNIT, where he is aided by the Brigadier who appears to be a curious blend of both Watson and the dim-witted Inspector Lestrade. The Third Doctor’s companions, in particular Jo, also fulfill the Watson role that I have described above. The climax to the vague Sherlockian allusions in “The Silurians” and “The Daemons” is “The Curse of Peladon”, described by some as Baskervillian, in which the Doctor’s tweed cape comes closest to an approximation of Sherlock. He also demonstrates martial arts, probably not too disimilar to Sherlock’s baritsu.

When the Fourth Doctor began his tenure, he had the most blatant attempt at Sherlockian characterisation. Leaving aside “Talons of Weng-Chiang”, which I will discuss in detail in Part 2, the Doctor refuses to contact the police in “Pyramids of Mars”, as he believes that they will hamper his investigation, uses his deductive skills whilst dealing with “The Robots of Death”, and borrows Sherlock’s decoy effigy trick in “The Deadly Assassin”. The Fourth Doctor was clearly an eccentric, but was an endearing one, unlike Sherlock who alienated nearly everyone that he met, apart from his faithful Watson.

The Fifth Doctor showed little Sherlockian qualities, despite being involved in a country house mystery in “Black Orchid”. However, this was more of an Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple mystery, rather than a Sherlockian one and it is more by luck than any great detective work that the Doctor finds himself a free man. The Fifth Doctor despite being the perfect cricket-playing gentleman shares little with the master detective, being too nice to annoy anyone.

In stark contrast is the loud abrasive the Sixth Doctor, as eccentric as any of his predecessors, but there is little endearing about his character. In this respect, he mirrors Sherlock. In fact, script editor Eric Saward (quoted in 'The Sixth Doctor Handbook') stated: “we were going to try and introduce…..a sort of Holmesian ability to make extraordinary deductions.” However, whist with Peri, the Doctor had little chance to show his deductive powers, but on the Hyperion III in “Terror of the Vervoids”, he shows them as he notices the fake Mogaran, and finally tracks down the perpetrator of the deaths on the ship. Although superficially another Agatha Christie inspired story, with Professor Lasky reading “Murder on the Orient Express”, it is a Poirot-style story. Hercule Poirot is an eccentric Belgian detective, who uses his “little grey cells”, with the aid of his ex-military colleague who has a fondness for the female of the species. Who then is this based on, but Sherlock ? And in turn then, “Terror of the Vervoids” owes as much to Conan Doyle as to Christie. The Sixth Doctor’s wrapping up of the case is as workman-like as Sherlock’s would have been. However, the only fly in an otherwise unsullied ointment is that by this time, the Doctor’s character has mellowed, and is no longer as unfriendly as before. However, he does still share Sherlock’s habit of speechifying, his outbursts in the courtroom on Gallifrey equal those of Sherlock in “The Naval Treaty”.

The Seventh Doctor despite working with Sherlock in “All Consuming Fire”, and despite being even more English, in spite of his Scottish twang, than his predecessors, did not demonstrate any more deductive skills than the majority of his predecessors. The same goes for the Eighth Doctor, who turns out to be a fan of Sherlock himself, as he is reading “The Final Problem” at the beginning of the novel “The Bodysnatchers”.

The Ninth Doctor, with his non-interventionist actions also bears little resemblance to the Great Detective, whilst the Tenth Doctor also finds himself in an Agatha Christie murder-mystery (with Agatha herself), but again uses little deduction (and is very unlike Sherlock in relation to Rose). The Eleventh Doctor dresses as Holmes in 'The Snowmen' (where he is up against two Holmes actors, Richard E. Grant & Ian McKellen), but tends to leave many deductions to the Paternoster Gang (the ones he makes being wide of the mark), save his checking the most opened page in Dr. Simeon's diary.   (Matt Smith, however, did audition for the Watson part in 'Sherlock', prior to being cast as the Doctor)

However, we now find ourselves with another rude genius in the Twelfth Doctor, who shares many of the Sixth's (and Sherlock's) idiocyncracies, including speechifying, and rudeness to his sidekick/companion. However, the Twelfth Doctor may just have the edge with his more restrained tailoring – Sherlock would never wear a multi-coloured coat, even if in disguise. Roll on Series 10, then !

In the second part of this essay, I will look at the “Sherlockian crossover” stories themselves.