Season Two@60 The Crusade

 

The early years of Doctor Who did seem to like wholly historical stories which in theory were easier to produce than sci-fi ones. While there would be no issue with the Tardis landing amongst ordinary or fictional people, constant encounters with well-known historical figures creates limitations on the storylines. The BBC’s educational remit could be tested by depictions of the likes of Marco Polo or Nero interacting with the Doctor while not all stories are as strict about the effect the travellers have on history as `The Aztecs` is. Its probably why the wholly historical adventures were replaced by pseudo historical ones mixing supposedly real history with some alien antagonist. Though generally intelligently written and made `The Crusade` harbours these issues. All the way through you do get a sense that the production would be more interesting without the Doctor and his companions in it at all. It sits at the point where adherence to facts crashes into the need for some drama.

 

This is a more problematic period of history now than it may have been in the early Sixties when the Crusades were taught in schools mostly from the English point of view with little space for the Saracen perspective. The history I learned certainly neglected to mention that these `heroic` Crusades were basically an attempted invasion by England on religious grounds, a grand folly that cost thousands of lives.  And Richard was supposedly the good guy while his brother plotted at home. A four part serial such as this can’t really hope to encompass such a picture though David Whitaker subtly avoids the reasons for the Crusade, depicting Richard as a worn out, far from home King while Saladin is cautiously using both negotiation and strength to press his advantage. As a drama it has potential yet unfortunately it has to accommodate the Tardis crew!

While the sets- by Barry Newberry no less- are good in themselves there seems little attempt to convince us we are in the Holy Land. Richard’s base of operations is like a regular English castle whilst woodland that the Tardis initially lands in may well be the same one that we saw six weeks ago in ancient Rome. There is a passable market set, aided by sound design, and the environs of Saladin’s palace are Arabic in design but it would be difficult even now to reproduce the Sun and heat of the area in a studio production.

Then there’s the issue of white actors playing the key Arab roles. I suppose there were simply not Arab actors of sufficient experience to take on these parts sixty years ago (there are a handful in supporting roles) so this was the alternative. While justifiably seen as wrong now, it’s a pity that modern viewers may disregard such strong performances as those of Bernard Kay as the strategic, calm Saladin and Walter Randall whose El Akir is a memorably vicious villain with plenty of menace. One thing the production does get right is the pronunciation of Saladin’s name which wasn’t often taught in schools.

The director is Douglas Camfield later to become known for stylish, action stories and there are hints of that here in his liking for more dexterous camera work especially the fight sequences, notably one involving Ian that is shot from above. He even has people appearing to be shot by arrows, a difficult thing to pull off in a studio. Camfield makes the most of the cramped sets using shadow effectively – the marketplace scene in what is clearly a poky set is very well choreographed. Saladin enjoys an enigmatic introduction as we see his silhouette listening to a discussion on the other side of a curtain before the camera pivots so we can see him face on. For the production’s most fiery scene- an argument between Richard and his sister Joanna- the cameras follow them around the serial’s largest set drawing us in.

However `The Crusade` lacks the wit and charm of `The Romans’. Here the Doctor’s approach jars with the straightforward Englishness of Richard and his knights so William Hartnell has nobody to play off as he did in the earlier story. Mind you that doesn't stop him looking as if he's having the best time! Ian and Barbara have similar storylines as they did back in Rome  - she is captured several times and he sets off to rescue her. Vicki gets little to do except be disguised as a boy, a ruse that is unconvincing and leads nowhere. After the early promise of her debut story Maureen O’Brien must have been fed up already.

Julian Glover makes an imperious king Richard and it’s to the credit of David Whitaker’s script that the Lionheart is depicted here as being flawed and doubtful even if he would not admit it publicly. That he is so desperate to end the war he offers his sister to Saladin’s bother as a bride becomes the most interesting development. Joanna- played with a defiant regal flair by Jean Marsh- is having none of it and their subsequent argument is the best scene in the story. The script does delve as far as it dares into the seamier side of twelfth century life- there are a number of brutal deaths and Barbara is hidden at one point in a harem.

The more things progress the more it feels like the drama doesn’t really need the Doctor and co. Multiple antagonists put them in peril but, Barbara aside, none of it has particular bearing on the overall story. The Doctor burbles about the court much the same way he did in `The Romans` but the results are not as entertaining as his early scenes where he indulges in some crafty shoplifting. Without being able to change history the Doctor seems to encourage Richard in actions that history tells us will fail. A sequence where Ian is staked out in the desert as potential prey for some killer ants seems a bit of a time waster though admittedly is one of several facets of the story that work better in the novelisation for which this kind of tale is more suited. Besides, Ian has faced bigger ants that this!

Of course, any viewing of this story is hampered by the absence of two episodes represented instead by the famed telesnaps. In the days when we’re more used to animation for missing episodes watching grainy stills and listening to a scratchy soundtrack is not ideal especially in a story like this where the direction is one of the better aspects of the production.  `The Crusades` falls into that category of `not bad` which of course is where no artist wants their work to reside but it does have plenty of interesting moments thanks to Douglas Camfield’s invention and some top tier performances.

The Novelisation

This is one of the very best adaptations of a Doctor Who story, in fact I would suggest its even better than the tv version. Back in the day I picked up a second hand copy of one version of the pre- Target version published in the 1960s. I'm not a collector but I've kept it anyway for decades despite having the Target version which does have the better cover.