Francis Bacon had a few words on deformity = depravity/evil, which Shakespeare certainly made use of in his Richard III characterization. Medieval thought generally perceived disability as a physical manifestation of moral depravity. Renaissance thinkers ran with it, and here we are today, with a trope so embedded in our western subconscious it's heresy to point out how utterly wrong it is.
(rwnj prosperity christianists also apply it to the poor).
I have to say I agree with the sentiment of the argument you are making but I actually think Davros is a deeper character then his disabilities.
I do think his disabilities tho did add an iconic design that was represented of the Dalek he would create.
Now I personally believe it's good to show heroes and villains as disabled. As long as for the part of the villain the disability isn't the reason he's evil.
My biggest preference would be to have a disabled actor protray Davros as well as make it very clear to people he is a evil not because of his physical disabilities.
Personally I'm kinda disappointed with the black and white view RTD has put on Davros.
Instead of allowing for a skilled disabled actor to finally protray an iconic villain he takes away the disability and leaves no representation whatsoever.
It's a very surface level understanding of the character of Davros in my opinion that for me more speaks to the writers not being skilled enough to properly portray a villain beyond his surface materials.
Now I won't say something as dumb that simply introducing a good disabled character would solve everything. In truth if done for the purpose of having a disabled hero it would just be pandering.
I personally just don't think removing the disability does anything but subtract from this character. I don't have a solution to the damaging tropes of the past but I honestly don't think changing an iconic series villain will do anything in terms of solving the issue.
Actually reading most of these comments I think I may be on the wrong website to have a discussion on the actual character of Davros. Hell I'll admit I love Daleks and am disappointed not to see them this season.
Like I'll be honest, I collect Dalek figures and shit, I'm actually a dalek super fan.....
I see people here saying "Yeah, change him entirely, make him handsome! That'll make him better!"
Speaking as a person that collects the models, watches Dalek animations on YouTube daily, a super Dalek nerd you might say, I can see that my opinion isn't really represented much here. I suppose that's ok, tho I will insist that Davros is a better character in my opinion that a lot of people give him credit for
Oh ffs, this is dumb. Davros was severely mutated. It isn't s slight on handicapped people, or people in wheelchairs. If ANYthing, Davros from the 70's served as a sort of foreshadowing to what the Daleks themselves are. "Davros can't be in a chair because it may offend people who are in chairs" is about the dumbest reason I've ever heard for retconning a character.
That said, I don't really have a dog in this fight, as the series reboot is absolute trash compared to the classic series, which I still enjoy very much.
This, if anything, serves as reinforcement that I've made the right choice in abandoning this nonsense.
Wisher presented a malevolent antagonist who was a bit of a contradiction, which I think when held up to what we know, and perceive about Hitler, made sense. Davros was a crippled, broken, feeble, physical presence, but his MIND, his cunning ability to forsee, and predict... his ability to outmaneuver his opponents strategically is what made him strong. No, I think Davros NEEDED to be physically broken. It made his brilliance shine, and his need for the muscle of the Daleks underscored.
The show, today, is a trainwreck, and this is another example as to why.
I mean, making your villain disabled goes back to at least to Shakespeare making the Richard III in the play disabled even though the actual king may not have been, right?
He definitely had some sort of spinal issue going on, now that we've seen his skeleton. I wonder if that's been incorporated (how?) into how actors move portraying him... Henry VII was lucky that he had that to smear Richard with.
Now, the Banker in 𝐼𝑡'𝑠 𝑎 𝑊𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑒 was in a wheelchair... Although, yes, that's much newer. I'm sure there are older examples.
It could have back then. The medicine was nothing near what it is today. In about 1950 I went to grade school with a girl who was extremely bent due to scoliosis. In junior high one girl escaped the worst by having surgery and spending a full year in a major body cast. In addition a woman who worked in the rectory of our parish until she retired just before the COVID 19 shut down, had a hump on one side of her back due to scoliosis. Not everyone had the money or qualified for great medical care.
Oh, there was one of those history detective shows about this! Turns out, the plate of a cuirass and greaves etc interlocking as they did for a mounted knight would have taken all the weight off his spine and onto his hips, allowing movement of the arms and shoulders without strain on the affected muscles and joints. They got someone with untreated scoliosis, armoured him up and got him into a jousting saddle and he reported that it was better than fine once everything was in place.
Why do these a-holes think they have editorial control over what an artist or writer does or how they choose to express their talent or vision? Is that why despite Trump being physically and mentally repulsive to some of us, they depict him as strapping with big muscles (usually photoshopping another artist's work) because they cannot recognize evil unless it depicts a stereotype?
It's Science Fiction! Why wouldn't Davros use technology to make himself as mobile as anyone else. Or even moreso. With superscience and how many years in his timeline, he should be able to be whatever he wants to. Sh*t, he doesn't even have a sonic screwdriver.
Yep. I always assumed that he was using that tech at first to overcome a body that was failing and it essentially made him a cyborg. Not that he had been confined to it.
Nov 19, 2023·edited Nov 19, 2023Liked by Stephen Robinson
This was also an issue with The Da Vinci Code and the use of a person with albinism to fulfill the “evil, demented albino” trope. NOAH (National Organization for Albinism and Hyperpigmentation) requested that the character be changed in the movie because of said trope. It was refused on the grounds that the character was already set and part of the original story.
In Michael Crichton's "THE JAPS ARE COMING!"...sorry, I meant "Rising Sun"... a woman with a badly deformed arm was set up as a love interest. Pretty forward looking for Crichton at that part of his own arc. When the movie came out, that character had no disabilities. Just a standard-issue, gorgeous actress. We don't want to make the customers in the seats spit out their popcorn in disgust.
Weren’t these the same entitled fanboys who complained when the Doctor was (briefly) not a white man? I don’t think that was some evil Wook scheme or even an attempt to consider the look of a VERY paternalistic Brit white man going around “fixing” other cultures, usually to protect white British civilians. Rather, it was just an attempt to do something different, something unexpected.
Oooh, nice little burn at the end there!
Francis Bacon had a few words on deformity = depravity/evil, which Shakespeare certainly made use of in his Richard III characterization. Medieval thought generally perceived disability as a physical manifestation of moral depravity. Renaissance thinkers ran with it, and here we are today, with a trope so embedded in our western subconscious it's heresy to point out how utterly wrong it is.
(rwnj prosperity christianists also apply it to the poor).
I have to say I agree with the sentiment of the argument you are making but I actually think Davros is a deeper character then his disabilities.
I do think his disabilities tho did add an iconic design that was represented of the Dalek he would create.
Now I personally believe it's good to show heroes and villains as disabled. As long as for the part of the villain the disability isn't the reason he's evil.
My biggest preference would be to have a disabled actor protray Davros as well as make it very clear to people he is a evil not because of his physical disabilities.
I also think it's very important we don't exclude physically or mentally disabled people from being portrayed as both a hero or a villain.
Both are very important parts to a story and if done in a nuanced way can add complexity and depth to a character and story.
No individual is a monolith and we shouldn't exclusively type cast any stereotyp as good or evil.
Personally I'm kinda disappointed with the black and white view RTD has put on Davros.
Instead of allowing for a skilled disabled actor to finally protray an iconic villain he takes away the disability and leaves no representation whatsoever.
It's a very surface level understanding of the character of Davros in my opinion that for me more speaks to the writers not being skilled enough to properly portray a villain beyond his surface materials.
Now I won't say something as dumb that simply introducing a good disabled character would solve everything. In truth if done for the purpose of having a disabled hero it would just be pandering.
I personally just don't think removing the disability does anything but subtract from this character. I don't have a solution to the damaging tropes of the past but I honestly don't think changing an iconic series villain will do anything in terms of solving the issue.
Actually reading most of these comments I think I may be on the wrong website to have a discussion on the actual character of Davros. Hell I'll admit I love Daleks and am disappointed not to see them this season.
Like I'll be honest, I collect Dalek figures and shit, I'm actually a dalek super fan.....
I see people here saying "Yeah, change him entirely, make him handsome! That'll make him better!"
Speaking as a person that collects the models, watches Dalek animations on YouTube daily, a super Dalek nerd you might say, I can see that my opinion isn't really represented much here. I suppose that's ok, tho I will insist that Davros is a better character in my opinion that a lot of people give him credit for
I'm actually kinda hurt.... like I buy the figures, I actually care more about the silly pepper pots then the doctor lol.....
I don't really go on Fandom articles much, mostly keep to myself but idk.
I know it's ok that people have different opinions but it just feels like most here don't care in the slightest about my favorite thing.
Ah well guess I'll stick to myself and my fanfiction
Oh ffs, this is dumb. Davros was severely mutated. It isn't s slight on handicapped people, or people in wheelchairs. If ANYthing, Davros from the 70's served as a sort of foreshadowing to what the Daleks themselves are. "Davros can't be in a chair because it may offend people who are in chairs" is about the dumbest reason I've ever heard for retconning a character.
That said, I don't really have a dog in this fight, as the series reboot is absolute trash compared to the classic series, which I still enjoy very much.
This, if anything, serves as reinforcement that I've made the right choice in abandoning this nonsense.
Wisher presented a malevolent antagonist who was a bit of a contradiction, which I think when held up to what we know, and perceive about Hitler, made sense. Davros was a crippled, broken, feeble, physical presence, but his MIND, his cunning ability to forsee, and predict... his ability to outmaneuver his opponents strategically is what made him strong. No, I think Davros NEEDED to be physically broken. It made his brilliance shine, and his need for the muscle of the Daleks underscored.
The show, today, is a trainwreck, and this is another example as to why.
I like it. I binge Who and right now I'm a few seasons behind. Looking forward to catching up.
It's Davros pre-accident... and perhaps in a timeline where he's a bit more fortunate. Whining nerds are the worst nerds.
Vincent still had his ear!
I mean, making your villain disabled goes back to at least to Shakespeare making the Richard III in the play disabled even though the actual king may not have been, right?
He definitely had some sort of spinal issue going on, now that we've seen his skeleton. I wonder if that's been incorporated (how?) into how actors move portraying him... Henry VII was lucky that he had that to smear Richard with.
Now, the Banker in 𝐼𝑡'𝑠 𝑎 𝑊𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑒 was in a wheelchair... Although, yes, that's much newer. I'm sure there are older examples.
My understanding is it was more like what we would call scoliosis in more recent times and not nearly as severe as it’s usually shown in the play.
He had scoliosis. A condition that is treatable today. But not then.
Certainly it didn't give him a hunch. He was still able to ride and fight. He got to within metres of Henry 7 and nearly killed him personally.
It could have back then. The medicine was nothing near what it is today. In about 1950 I went to grade school with a girl who was extremely bent due to scoliosis. In junior high one girl escaped the worst by having surgery and spending a full year in a major body cast. In addition a woman who worked in the rectory of our parish until she retired just before the COVID 19 shut down, had a hump on one side of her back due to scoliosis. Not everyone had the money or qualified for great medical care.
Oh, there was one of those history detective shows about this! Turns out, the plate of a cuirass and greaves etc interlocking as they did for a mounted knight would have taken all the weight off his spine and onto his hips, allowing movement of the arms and shoulders without strain on the affected muscles and joints. They got someone with untreated scoliosis, armoured him up and got him into a jousting saddle and he reported that it was better than fine once everything was in place.
Sheeit we got bigger fish to fry here....let Davos walk damn it!
Well, not that rich people conference in Switzerland, but otherwise, yes.
Why do these a-holes think they have editorial control over what an artist or writer does or how they choose to express their talent or vision? Is that why despite Trump being physically and mentally repulsive to some of us, they depict him as strapping with big muscles (usually photoshopping another artist's work) because they cannot recognize evil unless it depicts a stereotype?
You had me at "David Tennant has returned as the Doctor..."
only for 3 episodes. I am far more excited that Catherine Tate is back as Donna for these 3 episodes
I will gladly take three episodes
It's Science Fiction! Why wouldn't Davros use technology to make himself as mobile as anyone else. Or even moreso. With superscience and how many years in his timeline, he should be able to be whatever he wants to. Sh*t, he doesn't even have a sonic screwdriver.
Yep. I always assumed that he was using that tech at first to overcome a body that was failing and it essentially made him a cyborg. Not that he had been confined to it.
Can't wait. Tennant is my favorite Doctor!
This was also an issue with The Da Vinci Code and the use of a person with albinism to fulfill the “evil, demented albino” trope. NOAH (National Organization for Albinism and Hyperpigmentation) requested that the character be changed in the movie because of said trope. It was refused on the grounds that the character was already set and part of the original story.
In Michael Crichton's "THE JAPS ARE COMING!"...sorry, I meant "Rising Sun"... a woman with a badly deformed arm was set up as a love interest. Pretty forward looking for Crichton at that part of his own arc. When the movie came out, that character had no disabilities. Just a standard-issue, gorgeous actress. We don't want to make the customers in the seats spit out their popcorn in disgust.
“It's an iconic character design”
Yes, that’s the stereotype part!
Weren’t these the same entitled fanboys who complained when the Doctor was (briefly) not a white man? I don’t think that was some evil Wook scheme or even an attempt to consider the look of a VERY paternalistic Brit white man going around “fixing” other cultures, usually to protect white British civilians. Rather, it was just an attempt to do something different, something unexpected.