Doctor Who's Robot

The Doctor Who serial "Robot", written by Terrance Dicks and directed by Christopher Barry, introduced Tom Baker as the Fourth Doctor in a four episode story first broadcast in 1974. Regenerating in his lab at the headquarters of the United Nations Intelligence Taskforce (UNIT), the Doctor is placed in the care of medical officer Harry Sullivan, while his journalist companion, Sarah Jane Smith, launches an investigation of the National Scientific Research Centre, aka ThinkTank. Scientists there are misusing a robot, K1, designed for work in dangerous environments.

 The serial was influenced by sources such as the film King Kong (1933) and the novel I, Robot (Asimov, 1950) [1]. While it has been criticised for failures of its ambitious special effects, and for its somewhat stereotypical villains, it is notable for presenting a microcosm of themes in 1970s Doctor Who, particularly those touching on scientific and technical matters. Here we're going to take a look at it as a case study of representation of 1970s science.

[Note: For those who prefer my more usual topic-related articles, in several places I link through to general topic-related blogs I've previously written which this story touches upon.]

Representations of Scientists

A key theme of this serial is the representation of science and scientists. An important factor in the ongoing success of Doctor Who is its ability to reimagine itself through the regeneration of its central character. A change in the lead actor is inevitably accompanied by a change in personality and priorities for the Doctor, and often with a change of tone and production leadership for the series. Waking as the Fourth Doctor at the start of the first episode, and erratically unstable at first, Tom Baker’s Doctor explores his own identity and personality throughout the story. Key to that is his identity as a scientist, and particularly in the inherited role of the scientific advisor for UNIT.

While the Fourth Doctor was typically less stern and more whimsical than the Third, and would rapidly move away from UNIT-focussed stories, "Robot" is careful to establish him as highly technically competent, observant and able to contribute to the role should he so choose. He is the first to see a pattern in a series of thefts of electronic components, and to observe a flattened dandelion which acts as a clue to the thief. Later in the serial, he also demonstrates ability for rapid analysis of a “metal-eating virus” (best rationalised as some kind of oxidising corrosive) and of the high-speed computer coding necessary to negate a nuclear threat. In giving Baker’s Doctor these opportunities, "Robot" is not only demonstrating the Doctor’s competence and authority, but also providing a connection back to the first three Doctors, each of whom identified themselves at different points as scientists (although only the Third appears to have done so professionally). The Doctor’s science is nonetheless distinct from that of the humans around him - based primarily on previous advanced knowledge, rather than trial and error, and so largely unexplained to the characters around him (or the audience). While the First Doctor was used occasionally in the role of a teacher, providing pedagogic material for children, by the advent of the Fourth Doctor, the focus is on plausible but perhaps less considered adventure.

However "Robot" is also notable for its representations of human science. Much of the story is focussed in and around a centre known as the National Institute for Advanced Scientific Research, or colloquially as Think Tank. This is explicitly described as a centre for pure research - we are told that when concepts are ready for practical application they are passed on to other facilities. Despite this, the work is considered highly secret. In fact, we see very little of what Think Tank is working on, or of how it’s funded, except that it appears to be some kind of government-sponsored laboratory. In many ways this is the opposite of how think tanks work in the real world. Blue skies, fundamental and non-applied research is often the most openly discussed amongst scientists independent of nationality - and the most challenging to fund. Concepts and ideas are often rooted in physics so fundamental that its advances are common to the whole community, rather than kept tightly secret - more restrictions apply more strongly when the focus shifts instead towards commercialisation or military applications. Nonetheless, government-, military- and commercial-sponsored think tanks have existed and continue to exist to the current day, although their prevalence was already declining in the 1970s when “Robot” was made.

An interesting aspect of Think Tank, and one which is explicitly commented on in the text, is its leadership. The deputy director Jellicoe is a white, male, slightly-balding man approaching middle age, not very different from stereotypical scientists of the time, although perhaps slightly younger. Indeed, the Doctor’s companion Sarah Jane Smith initially mistakes this man for the director. However the organisation is actually led by a female scientist, Miss Hilda Winters. She dresses smartly, although not attractively or adventurously, and wears large glasses, but is both younger than Sarah expects, and of a different gender. In the documentary accompanying the DVD release of "Robot", there was discussion from both the actor and production team of Miss Winters as being inspired by feminism - and hence as deliberately anomalous rather than a recognition of any norm. It’s interesting to note that while she is described as a scientist, she is only ever described as Miss (although Dr or Prof would be far more likely for any research scientist, let alone a senior one) and her area of specialism is not mentioned. In the 1970s, under-representation of women in academia (and particularly hard sciences) was recognised as a problematic waste of potential, although the systemic barriers to career progression and recognition remained in place. It’s notable, for example, that there is no indication that any of the main scientist characters in this serial were ever married, or even in relationships, leaning in to the traditional representation of science and academia more generally as opposed to emotion and being associated with asexuality or emotional coldness. Indeed, the journalist companion Sarah Jane is used to highlight this representation by providing the ‘non-scientific’, emotional and empathetic heart of the story.

Even more obviously leaning into the problematical stereotypical representation of scientists as elderly, obsessive, irrational and marked out by wild hair was the key character of robot inventor Professor Kettlewell. The actor was partly responsible for suggesting the character's hair style [2], which at the time (and since) was largely associated with a single scientist: Albert Einstein. The prevalence of this stereotype (which has never been representative of the majority of the scientific community) has been recognised as harmful and off-putting to those who might otherwise wish to join the field - indeed the UK Institute of Physics recently ran a campaign called "Bin the Boffin" explicitly to combat such clichéd visualisations. This visual representation is also often associated with a lack of worldliness and practicality (as again inspired by anecdotal stories regarding Einstein). Indeed, Kettlewell’s obsessiveness is later shown to be allied with naivety and a failure to recognise political realities.

However just as Winters subverts the visual stereotype of scientists, she also subvert the stereotype of naivety. Both Winters and her deputy are heavily involved with the Scientific Reform Society (SRS), a (fictional) fascist organisation which believes that scientists are best fitted to rational decision making and so should take leadership of the world. They initially recruit and then use Kettlewell to pursue that goal, to the extent of building an experimental weapon and stealing nuclear launch codes. The rise of right-wing organisations (after a post-war lull) was an ongoing concern of science fiction (and indeed Spy-Fi) in the 1960s and 1970s [3]. Here this possibility is merged with an implicit assumption of superiority by the scientists of the SRS. Again this leans into the idea of scientists as lacking empathy or understanding of others, and also to narratives of scientists as arrogant. Indeed, the concept of scientism - that science and scientists should rule the world - is a recurring theme throughout science fiction, and in the 1970s was still informed with fears provoked by the nuclear threats that arose from the Manhattan Project.

Science and Society

Indeed, aspects of the intersection of science with society in the serial are dominated with fears of nuclear war and other weapons technology. This is particularly clear in the finale, where a set of nuclear codes become a key factor. However it is also manifest in the disintegrator gun whose components are stolen at the start of the story, and which is used by the robot towards the end. The threat of international espionage is very real in this cold-war story, albeit proving unrealised in the end. A more subtle nod to the then-current fear of biological weaponry can be found in the idea of a ‘metal-eating virus’ - although both living metal and viruses that can target it are well outside of human science.

 The growing impact of environmental science and public awareness of environmental concerns can also be seen in the motives and actions of Professor Kettlewell. The scientist developed his metal-degrading virus with an intention of reducing waste in stock piles and land-fill (although recycling would seem a better option that destroying metal, and it’s not clear how any such virus would be prevented from destroying still-working infrastructure [4]). We learn in the story that Kettlewell has turned away from robotics development to work on solar panels and renewable energy, and later that his tentative support for the SRS is driven by his concern over the mismanagement of environmental resources by conventional politicians rather than an intrinsic belief in scientific rule.

However by far the dominant theme in the story is that of automation and machine intelligence. Kettlewell’s robot K1 was originally designed for tasks which would be difficult or dangerous for humans, such as handling nuclear waste. At the time this serial was being made, the industrial base of Britain was seeing changes in employment patterns due to increasing levels of automation, particularly of computer and microprocessor-driven machines in factories. Opinions were mixed on whether this would increase competitiveness and make routine tasks more efficient, or whether it would result in job losses and obsolescence for an anxious workforce. A number of contemporary science fictions, included other Doctor Who stories, explored the ideas of societies that have become entirely dependent on robots. This possibility, and the industrial unrest of the time, is not explored in the serial but nonetheless forms part of the background context for this narrative, and would have affected the manner in which such a robot might be perceived by its audience.

However K1 demonstrates a level of autonomous thought and emotion which far exceeds the requirements of such tasks. During the course of the serial it is shown acting violently towards humans who it has been directed are ‘enemies of humanity’, but also shown to be constrained by a “Prime Directive” of obeying humans unless that would injure a human being. 

As Terrance Dicks himself has noted in interviews (e.g. in the UK DVD extras and in his book The Making of Doctor Who, 1976), this is a direct application of the famous Three Laws of Robotics defined by Isaac Asimov in Runaround (short story, 1942):

1. A robot may not injure a human being, or through inaction allow a human to come to harm

2. A robot must obey a human being, unless doing so would conflict with the first law

3. A robot must preserve its own existence, unless doing so would conflict with the first or second laws.

Interestingly, Asimov himself did not define a zeroth law, requiring the protection of humanity (as obeyed by Robot K1), until Robots and Empire (1985). However, by the time Doctor Who’s “Robot” was made, the faults and logical compromises of the Three Laws had already been extensively explored in science fiction literature (particularly Asimov’s own writings) and shown to lead to unworkable conflicts. The K1 robot demonstrates the impact of these conflicts in a series of mental conflicts which ultimately result in him destroying his own creator and going on a destructive rampage in a fit of Oedipal angst.

More generally though, the story asks questions regarding the potential autonomy of conscious machines, and the morality of constraining them by programming (which can be altered by malicious actors) as a form of enslavement. When the robot is given an order that conflicts with its prime directive as a demonstration, Sarah Jane Smith protests against the obvious distress this causes. This advocacy is pivotal in establishing the relationship between K1 and its only human friend.

The story also considers the balance between emotion and logic - amongst the main cast Sarah personifies emotion, while the Doctor and the Think Tank are shown as motivated by (different, and often faulty) logic, but the K1 robot is torn between the two. While constrained by the logic of its programming, and forced to obey, it is also able to perceive that it is receiving immoral instructions, and makes emotional connections with both its creator and Sarah. In the end sequence, the robot is clearly torn and distressed by being forced into an unfamiliar environment, so that both the action and its emotional context echoes the themes of the classic film King Kong, in which an otherwise inoffensive creature rampages when being brought into an alien environment for the benefit of a few individuals. 

This is not accidental. Providing a summary of the production of this serial in “The Making of Doctor Who” by Terrance Dicks and Malcolm Hulke (non-fiction, revised edition, 1976), Dicks comments on the deliberate analogy with King Kong and his desire to make the robot a sympathetic monster (as opposed to more conventional Doctor Who monsters) from the outset.

A microcosm of Doctor Who and Science

Science fiction as a genre projects contemporary science and technology into the future in order to extrapolate current societal concerns to their logical conclusions. Since its inception in 1963, the television series Doctor Who has remained true to this remit, addressing concerns over race, gender roles, gender identity, industrial relations, right wing politics, broadcast and social media, medical innovation, environmental damage, teenage delinquency and many others. The serial “Robot” is in many ways a typical example of a socially-engaged story from the Doctor Who of the mid-1970s, picking up themes which had been present in the series since its beginning and adding additional reflections motivated by ongoing social and scientific development.

In its engagement with science themes, “Robot” is at times backwards looking - the K1 robot and its creator could have been lifted straight from the pages of a pulp magazine of the 1930s - but it adds more contemporary themes such as the role of female scientists and environmentalism. Its representation of scientists is largely positive overall, both in the Doctor’s character and in the ultimately-sympathetic and misguided Kettlewell, despite carrying a warning in the form of Winter and the SRS. This is a worldview in which science has great potential for improving the human condition - but must be regulated by moral, emotional and ethical considerations. The SRS is described as a fringe organisation - like UFO spotters or Flat Earthers - and it’s made clear that its views represent a small minority, but it stands in the story for hard science untempered by other disciplines. 

The titular robot himself encapsulates the potential of automation and artificial intelligence to improve life, but also the threat of its uncontrolled (or incorrectly controlled) introduction to a world unready for it, and for which it is unready.

“Robot” is a storyline informed by a long history of science fiction and by a decade and more of Doctor Who’s own narrative development. Its special effects (groundbreaking at the time), and somewhat mannered acting and presentation, have aged poorly. However its themes capture a microcosm of Doctor Who’s perceptions of science at the time, and many of them find echoes and relevance in society to the present day.