When the TARDIS once again misses its intended destination, the surprise is less that they failed to arrive than that it was closer than usual. For while the Ship materializes in London, it's not the London of 1963 but the London of 1605, with a dissolute king on the throne and discontent between Protestants and Catholics barely below the surface. As Ian and Barbara set out for the Globe Theatre, the Doctor and Vicki make their way to Whitehall to see the King James Bible taking shape. Yet awaiting everyone is the impending opening of Parliament — and with it the plot by a group of Catholics to blow it up. The Doctor and his companions soon discover, though, that the history of their plot is far more complicated than they know — and one in which they quickly find themselves inextricably enmeshed.

As both a novelist and as a screenwriter Gareth Roberts has enjoyed a long association with the Doctor Who franchise. With this novel, his skills as a writer are on full display, as he puts together a cracking good adventure that embodies all of the elements of a classic First Doctor adventure. The plot is a straightforward historical adventure common to the era, and his characterization of the Doctor and his companions rings true to their portrayal on the show. That it isn't hard in the least to see how it could have been made into a serial for the show is a testament to his achievement with this book, which is among the best of the "Virgin Missing Adventures" series and which fans of the earliest Who tales likely will find enjoyable reading. ( )

The First Doctor, Ian, Barbara, and Vicki land in London, November 1605. The Doctor wants to check out the King James translation of the Bible and takes Vicki with him, while Ian and Barbara decide to take in the cultural scene at the Globe. However, a chance encounter with Catholic spies envelops Ian and Barbara in the Gunpowder Plot, potentially changing the history of the United Kingdom.

This was a great adventure. I enjoyed the time period and the choice of setting. It really did feel like a historical in the mould of the stories that William Hartnell et al. dramatized during the First Doctor’s reign. Admittedly, I kept picturing James VI and I looking more like Alan Cumming, because James shows up in the Thirteenth Doctor episode “The Witchfinders”, but that’s not really a problem. Even less of a problem is picturing Guy Fawkes as the Dread Pirate Roberts ;) I would, however, quibble with the use of “sirrah” as an appellation. To my understanding, “sirrah” is used to address someone you believe to be your inferior, and I’m not sure that it was being used in quite that way here.

I would recommend this for people who like Doctor Who with a historical twist, particularly if they enjoyed “The Witchfinders”. ( )

http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1271423.html

A Doctor Who Missing Adventure novel, featuring the First Doctor, Ian, Barbara, Vicki and the Gunpowder Plot. I think this is the first Who book I have actually given up on. I found the first hundred pages stylistically dull, historically stupid (James I's father was not blown up at Bannockburn, the Doctor is rather unlikely to have tried staying at monasteries in England in 1605) and really offensively anti-Catholic. I skimmed a couple of online reviews of the whole thing to see if it might be worth persevering, but I rather got the impression that it just gets stupider and more annoying. I am glad to say that Roberts' other efforts at this period (DWM comic strip 'A Groatsworth of Wit' and TV story 'The Shakespeare Code') are much more successful.

-----------------------------------------------

http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1908806.html

I had given this First Doctor story a try once before, and thoroughly bounced off it, but for the sake of completeness I thought I should give it another go. It's not quite as bad as I thought first time round - in particular, I retract the accusation that the book itself is anti-Catholic - but the number of historical and linguistic solecisms is still far too great for me to appreciate what I will admit is a reasonably well-constructed plot, with quite a nice twist at the end about Guy Fawkes. (Among other irritations: several characters reminisce about the King's father, who had in reality been assassinated almost forty years earlier in another country; the Lord Chamberlain of the day was actually the naval hero and aristocrat the Earl of Suffolk, not the buffoonish and anonymous bureaucrat here; and the portrayal of priests, monks and nuns is utterly anachronistic.) Readers less burdened with knowledge of the period than I am may well enjoy it more than I did. ( )