Why Shouldn’t Davros Walk?

Apparently, Twitterverse Who fandom is up in arms about a 5 minute skit on Children In Need on Friday night in which the newly-regenerated Doctor crashes into Davros’s laboratory at the moment he reveals the “Mk III Travel Device” to his subordinate. The crime? That Davros is depicted as an able-bodied man, rather than the wheelchair user “half-Dalek” he was portrayed as in Genesis of the Daleks and every other appearance since (with the exception of his Emperor Dalek form in Remembrance of the Daleks, where only his head remains).I want to get one thing cleared up straight away, since there is also some discussion of whether this is “retconning” (retroactively changing continuity), by contradicting Genesis of the Daleks.

And yes, it does pretty much contradict major plot points and backstory established in the original Genesis of the Daleks episode.

On the other hand, “Dimensions in Time” (which included more than one past or present Doctor at the time), and “The Curse of Fatal Death” (which didn’t), were also charity telethon segments,and I don’t think anyone seriously argues either of those were ever canon. This is a joke. A skit. A piece of humorous entertainment. It doesn’t seem like it is intended to be taken seriously, and why should it be?

So, it makes no sense to treat this as canon, and that’s okay, it doesn’t have to be. It can be its own thing. The Dr Who Magazine comics are their own thing too, and even though the current run is being coordinated with the Specials soon to be broadcast, I don’t think most fans would insist they had to be treated as canon either.

So that brings us to the debate over whether it’s okay for Davros to be able-bodied now.

As far as story is concerned, Davros pre-disfigurement was an ordinary able-bodied scientist. The amazing “Second Empire” webcomic completely re-imagines the origins of the Daleks, as well as telling a compelling (and outrageously non-canonical) tale of a great schism across the Dalek ranks. (It’s a fantastic comic, go read the whole lot, after you’ve read this!) In Second Empire, Davros is a relatively young and gifted scientist, and creates the Daleks with more noble intentions.

Equally, as some on Twitter pointed out, we’ve seen Davros absorb some of the Doctor’s regeneration energy and became revitalised. It’s easy enough to imagine a new, fully-healed, body being the eventual consequence of that later. Or of Dalek science reaching the point where they can give him a fully-humanoid body again (though it seems against Dalek principles to do that). Or maybe some other highly-advanced race, not knowing who Davros is, does this feat for him.

What it comes down to is the inclusiveness question. Which is the justification that Russell T Davies has given for the change.

The “disfigurement = evil / evil = disfigurement” trope has been a harmful one, present in literature at least as far back as Shakespeare. And Doctor Who is not immune in other episodes and examples of buying into it. (That said, it also has subverted the trope on many occasions). At the heart of the Davros question is whether his appearance has been a part of the same trope.

I never really viewed it that way. I viewed Davros as this megalomaniac genius who was somehow Joseph Mengele and Stephen hawking rolled into one, with the politics and biological sciences of the former, and the disability tech and physics knowledge of the latter. And crucially, his politics preceded his disfigurement/disability. He was canonically the Kaleds’ lead scientist before being injured in the war, pursuing the same goal of extermination of the enemy.

Crucially, all the other (able-bodied) figures in the episode have similarly fascist views and goals, and are eager followers of Davros in his Dalek project. The idea that being disabled made Davros evil doesn’t seem reflected anywhere in the canon – nor is his disfigurement depicted in any way as being a consequence of his evilness. When the Doctor challenged him, trying to convince him to abandon the creation of the Daleks, on whether he would use a weapon that would wipe out all life in the universe, Davros’s answer was not that of a bitter or vengeful disabled person, but of an absolute megalomaniac. “Yes. Yes, I would. To have that power would be everything.”

(At this point, I feel like I should add that, having watched the clip in question, I feel like this version of Davros is still a depiction of a disabled person. He is clearly hunched and claw-handed, so that some people saw a parallel between this depiction and Despicable Me’s Gru character.)

It’s worth mentioning on the counter argument that canonically, Davros was inspired to create the Daleks in his own image, after his disfigurement. Using the same tech as his wheelchair/life-support/communication device, and pushing the mutations and genetic changes to their ultimate conclusion, he envisaged a race exactly like himself.

But even this, I felt, was subverting the usual tropes around evil and disability. Rather than reject his disability, and his assistive technology, he saw them as part of himself. There is a potential argument that Davros depicts a positive view of disability, at least, in how he relates to his own disability. To make that argument would leave aside all the other aspects of the character, of course, but I mention it to show that Davros is a much deeper and more complex character than the tropes would allow.

The final consideration I bring is that there is a tendency to see villains as intrinsically negative. In order to avoid excluding minority or oppressed groups, the argument seems to go, we can never have a villain who is a member of that group. Only “good” guys can be disabled, BAME, gay, trans.

I’ve heard it said that the measure of feminism’s success is not having a woman to vote for, but being able to vote against a woman (because there’s more than one woman on the ballot). In the same way, I feel like inclusiveness is having myriad depictions of Black people, gay people, trans people, etc. And that includes disabled people. We absolutely do need more positive depictions, both in Doctor Who, and in wider media. One of the big reasons why the “disfigured = evil” trope is such a problem (and also “gay-coded villain”, for example) is that these are so widespread that they can be the only depictions people see.

A story that I would love to see would be a contemporary of Davros whom Davros saved using the same technology that gives Davros his life and mobility. This contemporary, however, instead of embracing Davros’s Nazi-like obsession and megalomaniacal desire to see his creations rule the universe, rebels and attempts to sabotage it, maybe even seeking a peaceful resolution to the war that has all-but annihilated life on Skaro. This character was perhaps buried in the research station along with Davros and the Dalek facility, in some deep, hidden prison cell. Centuries later, the Doctor could turn up and meet this pacifist-Davros-parallel and help them escape. All manner of ways that story could result in climactic tension.

The logic is not so much “good-Davros balances out bad-Davros” but rather to show and to explore the nuances and other possibilities. There are, after all, several other good guy disabled people in fiction, from Ironside and Lincoln Rhyme to Professor “X” Charles Xavier. I’m not saying any of those cancel out the many baddies. I’m just saying that, rather than erase a villain, maybe introduce a heroic figure as well?

All of which is all very well, and might give the impression that I think Davros should remain in his wheelchair.

But there’s one thing that outweighs all the above.

Disabled people are saying this is a positive thing for them. And for all the reasons why I might prefer to see some other approach, I don’t (yet) have lived experience as a disabled person. If they’re saying this undoes harms, and makes things better, then all my theorising means very little.

I’ve already explained how there are so many ways you could make Davros able-bodied and not ruin continuity. Exploring Davros’s relationship to the Daleks after such a change could be extraordinary writing and development. I would love to see that handled with respect and complexity.

And Doctor Who has survived bigger changes than this, after all. So ultimately, why shouldn’t Davros walk?