Why did eccleston leave and other matters

[fredjones]

I've been reading about Barrowman and Clarke and the fact that nothing came to a head during the production of the show. I also read comments which RTD made about fans or even "mongs" (as RTD charmingly put it) as well as the reasons why Eccleston left (and also what happened after he left). I also noted the manner in which certain fora treat those who perhaps are less than positive about the new series.

Eccleston has not been entirely clear as to what the atmosphere on the show was like which prompted his departure. 

Presumably there must have been incidents which led to Eccleston's departure and it would seem a fair assessment, given the fact that he will not mention what they are nor name particular incidences, that that departure occurred for the following reasons.

I sense and perhaps this is incorrect that it was an atmosphere of towel flicking and arrogance amongst the people responsible for the production and that they, rather like people of a certain age, would exclude, belittle and be arrogant towards those who were not part of the in crowd. I sense this is the case because the production oozed arrogance.

Is this assessment overly negative or is there some alternative explanation?

[iank]

He flat-out said at a convention last month that he was tired of working with RTD, Julie Gardner and Phil Collinson. Didn't go into details why or what happened exactly but he made it very clear that's why he left.

[fredjones]

Yeah why though? It's bugging me a bit.

One can assume that he left on the basis of incidents. Given what oozes out and originates from the production and indeed promotion of the series, as I outlined above, one would think it would be most likely that such incidents which may have occurred would be something of that nature.

Another aspect is being patronising and sneering at those who are autistic (ming mongs) in the part of people like RTD. This might explain why Eccleston did a series on this subject given that he might have had an awareness of what the fanbase tended to be like in many instances. A sort of riposte towards RTD and his ilk.

I felt Mr E's talents were wasted in the show. Truly.

[fredjones]

Why am I a possible sadako? Have I said anything contentious?

[Bernard Marx]

Nov 19, 2021 9:43:20 GMT fredjones said:

Why am I a possible sadako? Have I said anything contentious?

Everyone who's posted fewer than 10 posts has that ranking- don't worry about it. 

[Bernard Marx]

Nov 19, 2021 9:39:45 GMT fredjones said:

Yeah why though? It's bugging me a bit.

One can assume that he left on the basis of incidents. Given what oozes out and originates from the production and indeed promotion of the series, as I outlined above, one would think it would be most likely that such incidents which may have occurred would be something of that nature.

Another aspect is being patronising and sneering at those who are autistic (ming mongs) in the part of people like RTD. This might explain why Eccleston did a series on this subject given that he might have had an awareness of what the fanbase tended to be like in many instances. A sort of riposte towards RTD and his ilk.

I felt Mr E's talents were wasted in the show. Truly.

I reckon it was a combination of factors: He must have had a falling out with RTD relatively early on for some reason or another (I've heard that his very first filming block was the scene in Aliens of London where he had to chase a comedy pig), coupled with a dislike of Barrowman's on set antics and personality (as documented in articles previously). And yeah, he's openly discussed the fact that people on the lower rungs of the staff were treated unfairly, indicative of a hierarchal element of the production team which ran contrary to his more principled and egalitarian instincts.

What the actual specifics were is uncertain, mind you. I'd love it if, on a future series 1 re-release, a secret bonus feature is included where Eccleston simply reveals all, slagging off the entire production team in the process. 

[fredjones]

Nov 19, 2021 10:00:32 GMT Bernard Marx said:

Nov 19, 2021 9:39:45 GMT fredjones said:

Yeah why though? It's bugging me a bit.

One can assume that he left on the basis of incidents. Given what oozes out and originates from the production and indeed promotion of the series, as I outlined above, one would think it would be most likely that such incidents which may have occurred would be something of that nature.

Another aspect is being patronising and sneering at those who are autistic (ming mongs) in the part of people like RTD. This might explain why Eccleston did a series on this subject given that he might have had an awareness of what the fanbase tended to be like in many instances. A sort of riposte towards RTD and his ilk.

I felt Mr E's talents were wasted in the show. Truly.

I reckon it was a combination of factors: He must have had a falling out with RTD relatively early on for some reason or another (I've heard that his very first filming block was the scene in Aliens of London where he had to chase a comedy pig), coupled with a dislike of Barrowman's on set antics and personality (as documented in articles previously). And yeah, he's openly discussed the fact that people on the lower rungs of the staff were treated unfairly, indicative of a hierarchal element of the production team which ran contrary to his more principled and egalitarian instincts.

What the actual specifics were is uncertain, mind you. I'd love it if, on a future series 1 re-release, a secret bonus feature is included where Eccleston simply reveals all, slagging off the entire production team in the process. 

I might actually buy that but its a terrible shame he was so poorly served.

I think he's an outstanding actor but the comedy aspect which he didn't like was shall we say a bit cringy.

[fredjones]

What I loathe about that whole series was the following.

I recognize that the new series had to have a broad appeal and that it could not just cater for fans. At the same time, the old series and indeed forums and conventions was to a large degree a social club (if one can use the word social in this instance) for people on the spectrum which was useful insofar as such groups were not catered for.

It is not as if given the article in the fan gene amongst other things that there could not have been an awareness of this.

Along comes the team and indeed many other people sneering at people who happen to be on the spectrum. At the same time, the series and indeed the team starts ladelling on stuff about sexuality which is perhaps more suited to Eastenders, stating that people had to be tolerant.

It is an odd thing to ask people to be tolerant if you are yourself intolerant using words like ming mongs and so on.

[burrunjor]

Nov 19, 2021 10:44:46 GMT fredjones said:

What I loathe about that whole series was the following.

I recognize that the new series had to have a broad appeal and that it could not just cater for fans. At the same time, the old series and indeed forums and conventions was to a large degree a social club (if one can use the word social in this instance) for people on the spectrum which was useful insofar as such groups were not catered for.

It is not as if given the article in the fan gene amongst other things that there could not have been an awareness of this.

Along comes the team and indeed many other people sneering at people who happen to be on the spectrum. At the same time, the series and indeed the team starts ladelling on stuff about sexuality which is perhaps more suited to Eastenders, stating that people had to be tolerant.

It is an odd thing to ask people to be tolerant if you are yourself intolerant using words like ming mongs and so on.

Well I've written a series of articles detailing the downfall of DW and I always trace it back to a group I call the Fitzroy crowd.

Basically in the 1990s when DW was off the air a group of conceited fanboys who were in with the BBC took over the entire franchise. This clique consisted of RTD, Steven Moffat, Paul Cornell, Gary Russell, Chris Chibnall, Nicholas Briggs, Mark Gatiss etc. These guys all used to congregate at the Fitzroy pub, that was where they got to know each other, hence the title of the Fitzroy crowd. 

The Fitzroy club members for the most part didn't give a shit about DW. They liked it when they were kids, but most of them hadn't bothered to watch any of it since. They saw it as a way to launch their own careers to an international level and their own pet projects. (RTD famously wanted to make Torchwood before DW, but no one would buy it, so he then made it a spin off of DW.) 

These guys were given DW and took over every aspect of the franchise, from the tv show itself, to the comics to the audios to the books. They were always very prickly about criticism and would try and shut down dissenting voices even in the days of the virgin new adventures.

This quote from Laurence Miles a former member of their crowd sums up the type of attitude they always had, and I don't doubt for a second the reason Eccelston became persona non grata was because he too broke the unspoken code and riled them up that way. 

"I broke what Keith Topping called “the unspoken code”, the Omerta-like law which held that New Adventures writers should all stick together in the face of fandom and not publicly criticise each others’ work. I say “Omerta”, but in practice, they behaved more like Medieval overlords than mafiosa: the elite have to form a united front, because otherwise, they’ll be revealed as weak, flabby individuals and the peasants will get ideas above their station. Oh, and you’re the peasants, by the way. When the new series began, those authors who were promoted to scriptwriter-level went from “overlords” to “royalty”, which is why my heartless attack on Mark Gatiss was received with the same shock as if a small-time landowner in the Middle Ages had just referred to the Prince of the Realm as a big spaz.

You think I’m exaggerating…? Then consider this. When Paul Cornell took me to task for the social faux-pas of having opinions, he seemed appalled that I was incapable of respecting the natural hierarchy, and asked whether there was anybody I ‘bent the knee’ to. Bent the knee…? What is this, geek feudalism? When I told him that I had no interest in serving or reigning, he asked me: ‘Do your followers know that?’ I found it horrifying that anyone could even think that way, and I still do.”

Here are some more examples of the Fitzroy Crowd's arrogance towards critics. 

From RTD's own biography

“I do worry about being surrounded by yes-men. You’re right, it happens. […] I don’t think it’s happened to me yet. In the end, just as good writers are hard to find, so are good script editors, good producers and good execs. When you find good people like Julie and Phil, their sheer talent cancels out the risk of them yes-ing. I suppose the danger is not RTD And The Yes-Men, but a triumverate of people who are so similar that contrary opinions don’t get a look-in.”



"you are erased from Doctor Who"

What Steven Moffat screamed at his producer Caroline Skinner in 2012 after they had a massive bust up.

Of course when the revival aired it was a big success which just pushed these guys egos into overdrive. Now some might think "well the fact that it was a big success shows that they were right along." But actually it's not that simple. It was a success for the following reasons. 

A/ It was given a huge promotion constantly on the side of buses, in cinemas, radio times cover etc, which the original, even during the Dalekmania craze never got. (In the 80s it got ONE radio times cover.)

B/ There was a huge demand for DW among the general public. Not only had the videos and DVDs been a huge success, but anything DW related during the wilderness yeas had been too. Also in 2002 there was even a nation wide poll for which old series would people most like to see return and DW topped the poll, beating out Dad's Army, Blackadder etc. Best of all the poll was mostly voted for by people under 20. Clearly its absence made people yearn for DW all the more. 

C/ At the same time however as the show hadn't been mainstream for a long while, there were millions of young kids who would be exposed to the great things like Daleks, TARDIS, Cybermen, Regeneration etc for the first time via this series. It benefited from all the things the original created.

D/ It did tap into the zeitgeist at the time, which was brooding, tortured anti heroes who had done bad things and were on a mission of redemption (Xena, Angel) who were in relationships with teenage blonde girls from ordinary backgrounds (Gabrielle and Buffy.) 

E/ A lot of older fans during the wilderness years when the show was off the air had become insecure and neurotic because DW had become a whipping boy for shallow journalists because the BBC hated the original series. Sadly the shallow canutey, panel show comedians would jump on the bandwagon and bash it, creating the idea that it was a joke, even though it wasn't. I've detailed this in the past. Basically most modern comedians are cowards who only go after a target the media tells them too, but act ridiculously nasty to said target in order to make out they are edgy to morons. Sadly another of my faves Amy Winehouse went through this from these canutes too, who bullied her in misogynistic ways, only a few years later to reinvent themselves as feminists because that became trendy.

Still sadly the result of these canutes bullying the show was a lot of older fans became self loathing and so desperate for DW to be a mainstream success again, that they would back ANYTHING with the name DW on it, as long as it appealed to the shallow media. Hence their support for well everything in the revival LOL. 

Of course this isn't to say that the revival didn't strike a chord with some people. I personally do still enjoy the first 7 years of it, (though not as a continuation of Classic Who) but still all of these factors together helped to make the RTD era a phenomenon, and that in turn made his and the others arrogance even greater and the fandom even worse. Now they could bully dissenters as losers who would drag us back to the dark ages of the 90s.

The arrival of shallow, Rick from the Young Ones style identity politics into the fandom circa 2013 really made it toxic like never before however, as now the Fitzroy Crowd and their followers could bully and smear you as a sexist, a homophobe, a racist if you didn't like their changes to other peoples characters.

Here are some of the lovely things that have been said to me by fans on places like Gallifrey Base for the crime of having an opinion about the show they didn't like. 

“It would seem burronjor finds the Thirteenth Doctor a sexually dominating figure and that makes him uncomfortable. I’d suggest his anxiety about that is more a matter for himself and a professional working in confidence, rather than for the BBC to make changes to accommodate. I mean they don’t even take strobe lighting off shows to accommodate people with photo-sensitive epilepsy – they just give a warning. Accommodating people who have fringe sexual hang ups they’re uncomfortable with, so they’re not triggered, isn’t very practical.”

“Whiny little bigot, when we see women or non-whites promoted to primary hero figures, that’s enough for manbabies like you to bitch and moan about how oppressed they are.”

“I can only say, having been a fan since 1977 and an active member of this forum and its predecessor since 2003 you are, quite simply, the worst Doctor Who fan I’ve ever encountered.”

“It was about as mature, sophisticated and eloquent a response as the fetid maggot-strewn rubbish that you’ve been posting actually merits. Perhaps even more so, but I’m feeling generous, but is that your Mam shouting to tell you that your tea’s ready? Best run along now, before your fish finger butties go cold.”


And this is before I get into Elizabeth Sandifier taunting me to go and kill myself, knowing full well I have a history of severe depression and have tried to kill myself.

The only good thing was that it eventually all blew up in these bastards faces. Their arrogance led the Fitzroy Crowd to think they could get away with anything, and the toxic nature of their cult like fans drove people away from DW and for the first time did actually make the show a joke in the eyes of the common man. In the end their success was relatively short lived. Only 7 years from Tennant to Matt. Since then the show has crashed and burned with ratings going down literally every year (except for a brief spurt for Jodie's first series due to the novelty of a female Doctor.)

Now the shows been left in such a disastrous state that evidently no one outside of the Fitzroy Crowd wants to carry it on as it is now, hence why RTD has come back. It's sad, but the lessons to learn here are. Never let bullies change who you are, which sadly the middle aged classic era fans who always moan about the wilderness years did, and that cliques are always fokking awful. 

[fredjones]

Thanks for that detailed and very interesting reply

You can almost smell it through the screen. I could and its not that hard, given what you said and given what has been related, to understand why Eccleston resigned. And Eccleston has the principles and self respect not to put up with and morever to do a series on people on the spectrum.

The production as a whole reeked of insecurity and self-hatred to me.

Sherlock is better though and to be fair Moffat did sort of correct RTD.

As regards the "unspoken code" that extends to many areas and to some extent this is a reflection of that. If you suggest improvements or different ways of doing things to the benefit of everyone, you get shot down in different ways, either through being reflexively negative, aggressive, abusive, mobbed and so on.

It does seem to be more prevalent, from my experience, in England.

It is something I have encountered with those who deal with missing episodes, railways, British IT and so on and so forth.

I would be interested in reading your articles by the way. Whatever is eating that person must be suffering terribly and I am sorry you had to put up with that. It is however a reflection of the series to be frank

[fredjones]

There was one other aspect which perhaps belongs in conspiracy theory territory.

I remember reading and article about the security service (MI5) and science fiction fans whom they regarded as a threat for some odd reason (that and people who like the lawnmower man).

Might it perhaps in part be said that much of the "renovation" of the series (ie gutting it and changing it from science fiction as well as the installation of people who are responsible for a the culture you mentioned) occurred in part at the behest of the security service who don't like science fiction fans?

[UncleDeadly]

Nov 19, 2021 12:44:45 GMT fredjones said:

There was one other aspect which perhaps belongs in conspiracy theory territory.

I remember reading and article about the security service (MI5) and science fiction fans whom they regarded as a threat for some odd reason (that and people who like the lawnmower man).

Might it perhaps in part be said that much of the "renovation" of the series (ie gutting it and changing it from science fiction as well as the installation of people who are responsible for a the culture you mentioned) occurred in part at the behest of the security service who don't like science fiction fans?

Ha. Well. i've never heard that one, specifically. However, it would be analagous to ground we've covered on the Hive previously. That is to say speculation as to whether the general public's attitude to science fiction and its fans has changed markedly for the negative since the 1960's due to deliberate manipulation from the establishment via the media.

The reason for this, of course, would be the establishment's inherent suspicion and mistrust of science fiction due to its fundamental modus operandi of questioning current socio-political mores and injustices using allegorical context. It is, therefore, inherently subversive in nature. And WE CAN'THAVE THAT.

Indeed, something else we've discussed is whether Doctor Who itself may have been, at least partly, removed from the schedules due to political and ideological reasons. After all, isn't it somewhat interesting that during the '80s, as the old guard of the BBC were being replaced by Michael Grade and his neoliberal bean-counters, the series should find itself unceremoniously cancelled immediately after producing such satirical and dystopian stories as Revelation of the Daleks and Vengeance on Varos? Coincidence? I doubt it.

Frankly, i do view the progressive marginalisation of science fiction and its fans to be deeply suspicious and very convenient for certain people, and the easiest way to turn the impressionable off something that could be a threat to the status quo is to label them as "Uncool" for liking it. Didn't it used to be "cool" not to conform? What happened there...?

You're right, of course, to suggest that the MI5 thing comes over as very "Conspiracry theory"-ish. However, given that Harlan Ellison at once stage found his phone being tapped by the CIA due to being placed on Ronald Reagan's "Subversives List", is it, after all, totally implausible...?

"SCIENCE FICTION IS FOR NERDS!!"

"Socialism is dead in this country."

"We're all Thatcherites now."

"You will be like uzzzz...."

[burrunjor]

Nov 19, 2021 15:06:48 GMT UncleDeadly said:

Nov 19, 2021 12:44:45 GMT fredjones said:

There was one other aspect which perhaps belongs in conspiracy theory territory.

I remember reading and article about the security service (MI5) and science fiction fans whom they regarded as a threat for some odd reason (that and people who like the lawnmower man).

Might it perhaps in part be said that much of the "renovation" of the series (ie gutting it and changing it from science fiction as well as the installation of people who are responsible for a the culture you mentioned) occurred in part at the behest of the security service who don't like science fiction fans?

Ha. Well. i've never heard that one, specifically. However, it would be analagous to ground we've covered on the Hive previously. That is to say speculation as to whether the general public's attitude to science fiction and its fans has changed markedly for the negative since the 1960's due to deliberate manipulation from the establishment via the media.

The reason for this, of course, would be the establishment's inherent suspicion and mistrust of science fiction due to its fundamental modus operandi of questioning current socio-political mores and injustices using allegorical context. It is, therefore, inherently subversive in nature. And WE CAN'THAVE THAT.

Indeed, something else we've discussed is whether Doctor Who itself may have been, at least partly, removed from the schedules due to political and ideological reasons. After all, isn't it somewhat interesting that during the '80s, as the old guard of the BBC were being replaced by Michael Grade and his neoliberal bean-counters, the series should find itself unceremoniously cancelled immediately after producing such satirical and dystopian stories as Revelation of the Daleks and Vengeance on Varos? Coincidence? I doubt it.

Frankly, i do view the progressive marginalisation of science fiction and its fans to be deeply suspicious and very convenient for certain people, and the easiest way to turn the impressionable off something that could be a threat to the status quo is to label them as "Uncool" for liking it. Didn't it used to be "cool" not to conform? What happened there...?

You're right, of course, to suggest that the MI5 thing comes over as very "Conspiracry theory"-ish. However, given that Harlan Ellison at once stage found his phone being tapped by the CIA due to being placed on Ronald Reagan's "Subversives List", is it, after all, totally implausible...?

"SCIENCE FICTION IS FOR NERDS!!"

"Socialism is dead in this country."

"We're all Thatcherites now."

"You will be like uzzzz...."

Don't forget the CIA's insane attempts to deport John Lennon too. 

[UncleDeadly]

Nov 19, 2021 15:15:12 GMT burrunjor said:

Don't forget the CIA's insane attempts to deport John Lennon too. 

Oh, they had a hard-on for him too, did they? Doesn't surprise me. I mean, we can look back to Joe McCarthy's infamous communist "witch-hunts" of the 1950's. They didn't actually find any communists, of course, but they did manage to throw out Charlie Chaplin and Larry Adler because, after all, America's moral fabric was under immediate threat from comedians and harmonica players...

[Bernard Marx]

Nov 19, 2021 15:06:48 GMT UncleDeadly said:

Nov 19, 2021 12:44:45 GMT fredjones said:

There was one other aspect which perhaps belongs in conspiracy theory territory.

I remember reading and article about the security service (MI5) and science fiction fans whom they regarded as a threat for some odd reason (that and people who like the lawnmower man).

Might it perhaps in part be said that much of the "renovation" of the series (ie gutting it and changing it from science fiction as well as the installation of people who are responsible for a the culture you mentioned) occurred in part at the behest of the security service who don't like science fiction fans?

Ha. Well. i've never heard that one, specifically. However, it would be analagous to ground we've covered on the Hive previously. That is to say speculation as to whether the general public's attitude to science fiction and its fans has changed markedly for the negative since the 1960's due to deliberate manipulation from the establishment via the media.

The reason for this, of course, would be the establishment's inherent suspicion and mistrust of science fiction due to its fundamental modus operandi of questioning current socio-political mores and injustices using allegorical context. It is, therefore, inherently subversive in nature. And WE CAN'THAVE THAT.

Indeed, something else we've discussed is whether Doctor Who itself may have been, at least partly, removed from the schedules due to political and ideological reasons. After all, isn't it somewhat interesting that during the '80s, as the old guard of the BBC were being replaced by Michael Grade and his neoliberal bean-counters, the series should find itself unceremoniously cancelled immediately after producing such satirical and dystopian stories as Revelation of the Daleks and Vengeance on Varos? Coincidence? I doubt it.

Frankly, i do view the progressive marginalisation of science fiction and its fans to be deeply suspicious and very convenient for certain people, and the easiest way to turn the impressionable off something that could be a threat to the status quo is to label them as "Uncool" for liking it. Didn't it used to be "cool" not to conform? What happened there...?

You're right, of course, to suggest that the MI5 thing comes over as very "Conspiracry theory"-ish. However, given that Harlan Ellison at once stage found his phone being tapped by the CIA due to being placed on Ronald Reagan's "Subversives List", is it, after all, totally implausible...?

"SCIENCE FICTION IS FOR NERDS!!"

"Socialism is dead in this country."

"We're all Thatcherites now."

"You will be like uzzzz...."

The erosion of rebellion begins with the erosion of ideas, as so many writers of the genre have adroitly commented upon, so it's no surprise that the erosion of Science Fiction set into stone during that period too. 

It's analogous to the purging of left-wing philosophy in the 80s too. The Labour Party of the early 1980s was already deemed "hard-left" by much of the Party's right-wing and the press, despite their policies not differing massively from Harold Wilson's policy platform, albeit with a few extra tidbits about nuclear disarmament. Politics became all about triangulation, spin and focus groups, and because of this, so did much of the sci-fi genre.

Anything which Grade perceived as subversive threatened what he perceived as "quality TV", which invariably consisted of disposable reality TV programmes and prosaic broadcasts, which is why he's since admitted that he's always disliked science fiction. 

Incidentally, he now has a position in the House of Lords as a Tory Peer, and has done since 2011.