From the first time I realized that in its homeland Doctor Who is considered a children’s show – a little something to entertain the tots at tea time – I’ve been flabbergasted by the fact. Herein lies one of the blatant cultural differences between the UK and the US: while makers of television program(me)s in the UK seems to believe that kids enjoy not only a bit of peril in their stories but being asked to face some tough issues, those in the US think seem to think their audience is full of morons.
It’s frustrating. As someone who considers herself to be firmly outside the ranks of the morons (though I’m sure there are those who hold a dissenting opinion), I hate being “talked down to” by the shows I watch. I seek out shows that have a bit more bite to them, that stretch me a bit either intellectually, emotionally, or morally. That’s one of the reasons I love Doctor Who – it gives me all of those challenges at different times. And, at least in my experience, that’s not the norm in this neck of the woods.
Here in the US, the majority of television tends to be aimed at the “lowest common consumer,” so to speak. Anything that makes you think at all is usually either in the news/documentary category or relegated to the local PBS (Public Broadcasting System) station – or both. Costume drama? PBS. Literary mystery? PBS. Anything produced in Britain? PBS. I think you can see the trend here.
Granted, things have changed a bit since I was growing up, when all we got were three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) plus public television (PBS). Even so, if I were to look to anything labeled a “children’s” show, I’d have a hard time sitting through all the insipid drivel. Admittedly there are some gems (like the too-soon-canceled Fetch! with Ruff Ruffman), but overall, children’s programming here is geared specifically at a lower level of cognition and/or emotional maturity. (Hell, even much of the prime time offerings are.) So it’s hard for me to envision Doctor Who as a show for kids.
When you add in the part where science fiction shows (e.g., the various branches of the Star Trek franchise) are aimed squarely at an adult market (any kids they happen to draw in being a bonus), I hope you can appreciate how my particular acculturation would lead me to expect, when first coming across Who without any labeling besides “it’s a science fiction show,” that it was designed for a general (read: primarily adult) audience.
Let me interject here that while I certainly wouldn’t show Who to my kids (who, sadly, are currently still delicate little flowers who tend to get upset at the tiniest things in the videos they watch), I don’t find it at all inappropriate for children (assuming a certain level of maturity). Some of the same things that make it satisfying viewing for me make it great for kids, too, though we may appreciate it on different levels. It can be a gateway to deeper conversations with the kids with whom you watch about all sorts of things.
But a kids’ show? No.
Obviously, I’m not alone in this opinion. You have but to browse through the offering on Adventures with the Wife in Space to find plenty of instances where Sue agrees it’s “not for kids!” Certain situations are more likely to lead to this conclusion than others, but I contend if it can be said as often as Sue does, then the sentiment applies to the program as a whole.
Further, I’d bet that a fair number of Long-Term Fans out there have spent a non-negligible a mount of time defending Our Show to their friends using this very argument. Perhaps I’m projecting my own opinion on others, or making too much of comments I’ve seen in DVD extras, but I get the distinct feeling that even in the UK, there are plenty of fans who think the classification of Who as children’s television underestimates the extent of its appeal.
So I stand by my assertion that Doctor Who isn’t meant only for kids. Just the lucky ones.
Good Observation
I hadn’t noticed the difference between UK and US programming before, and I think you’re onto something.
BBC License
This is one of many reasons I wish I could get a BBC license and just watch it all the time!
It’s Expensive!
I do my best to watch a lot of BBC shows. Unfortunately, you can only get so many via Netflix and BBC America. I think BBC America, after one showing, tends to cut scenes, as well, in favor of commercials.
I have been shopping Amazon UK for years for all the reasons you wrote. The shows are smarter, more interesting, and well acted. Some of their comedy can be a bit harsh, but it’s still better than “just insult everyone” as seen on American t.v. People insult one another, the audience, and anything else the writers feel it’s funny to mock. I’m all for a good mocking, when it’s warranted.
Funny you should write this today. When I was watching Doctor Who during the holidays, my aunt, who is in her late 60s, turned to me and said, “Is this a kids’ show?” I told her that in some sense, yes, it was written for children, but also for adults.
Here’s my other point. I was looking at a biography of George Mallory (possibly the first to climb Everest in 1924, but died on the way down). I was looking at it because I think I might have already read a good portion of it, and can’t remember. 🙂 Anyway, after he died, the book talked about his children and wife. There was a photo of a huge rock in Brittany, and of his very small children climbing it. The children of Mallory said that their mother made sure that she wasn’t overprotective, because their father had died.
Okay, my point, finally – I took a look at those kids climbing that rock, and showed it to my husband. I said, “Can you imagine any parent these days allowing their kids to climb this rock?” He told me no, and said he wouldn’t let a child climb that rock. Some people would say that mother was careless; I’m not sure, and not judging either way. If it was my niece or nephew, I will admit I’d be nervous. But my point is that parenting styles have changed drastically in 80 years, and they are still very different in the UK.
I guess I should say I also taught Early Childhood Education at the college level and supervised student teachers – you wouldn’t believe the characters who wanted to go into teaching because they thought they could just “play” with the kids all day, without understanding why children play. I’ve been around these issues for a while.
Overall, I suppose I am saying that opinions vary – my aunt saw parts of a show once and thought it was for kids – probably for some of the silly humor she saw. She never saw some of the darker aspects. I told my 4 year old nephew the Doctor was a “superhero” so he would understand. I was watching in a different room, and he kept coming in – like you, MR, I’m not quite sure I would show certain things to kids. He only lasted a minute or so each time he came in and watched the Doctor. 🙂
I’m not sure, overall. My 2 1/2 year old niece loves pigs, as she has a stuffed pig pillow, and she watched the cartoon movie “Charlotte’s Web.” She cried at the thought of Wilbur dying, even though she doesn’t really understand what that is. If we expose them to a bit more complex thinking, I think they will rise to the occasion, as they grow and learn. What happens today, unfortunately, is that parents are no longer the primary source of information as children learn, and they used to be. Parents cannot control the information their children take in, nor can they even regulate it these days (50 years ago – teacher, school, home —- now, Internet, t.v., video games, kids at school who have this stuff if yours doesn’t). With this shift, we have seen things change drastically. Parents once decided when their child was mature enough to learn something that was adult – death, sex, etc… Emotional maturity is no longer a pre-requisite for learning about these things, and we are seeing what results.
I take your points well and think that some things are a bit dark for children. I do think kids’ shows these days tend to be a bit saccharin. Anyone sitting through “Yo Gabba Gabba” has to come away thinking that. 🙂
Stretching Children Is Good
While I don’t think of it as a show for children, I do think that it’s a great show for them to watch (again, presuming the particular child is mature enough to handle the themes) – with a parent or other engaged adult. But I also think that Brits in general tend to give kids more credit in the “maturity” department. 🙂 (A couple of cases in point: The Hobbit, the full range of Harry Potter novels…)
Parents Afraid of Getting Caught?
I liked Tree’s example of the kids climbing on the rock. I wonder if part of the issue is that modern American parents are afraid. They’re afraid of being sued. They’re afraid of being reported. They’re afraid of being caught out of context upon some passerby’s cell phone camera.
ex. Maybe it’s just me, but it used to be that if an adult saw the neighborhood kids all climbing his tree in his yard, he only shooed them off because they didn’t ask his permission and they’re going to accidentally scuff up his rock garden. Nowadays, he shoos them off because he’s nervous that if one of them falls out of the tree, the parents will sue. Sure, he might be thinking, “Aw. How quaint. I’ll just let ’em play. No harm in that. I remember being their age,” but then it dawns on him that he needs to pay his bills by the end of the month and can’t afford to defend against a lawsuit. 🙁
Likewise, no parent wants a candid photo posted to the latest “Dumb Parents Who Are Destroying America” groups on FB. Ironically, while breast-feeding in public is more acceptable, spanking one’s kids in public is taboo. (and kids can sense that they can get away with a lot more mischief nowadays IMO. If a store employee puts a hand on a child’s shoulder to stop the kid from knocking a merchandise display over, that employee is in a lot of hot water while the child and parent aren’t.) This is connected to the amount of risk we let our kids encounter. When I was in England years ago, I remember being fascinated by how few handrails and barricades there were in museums and upon castles. In America, everything was made too safe. In England, a tourist could walk up a tower’s outside stone steps with a three-story drop, and I considered it an honor that I was being trusted to have common sense.
Heck, I loved that I was literally experiencing walking up the same stone steps that once had knights and footmen running about during a siege, and they didn’t have handrails when arrows whizzed by their heads! 😀 In the UK’s museums, the public could walk right up to Egyptian sarcophagi and oil paintings which were painted before my country was even a bunch of colonies, and there wasn’t the usual roped-off barriers or plexiglass walls to keep morons from sticking bubble gum on King Tut’s armpit. I appreciated that amount of trust, as if their entire culture was telling me that even though it had never met me, it was willing to assume that I was mature enough to not draw graffiti upon the battlements.
I think their t.v. might be along the same lines.
I Concur (Partly)
I don’t think it’s necessarily “parents afraid of getting caught,” but that there is a greater culture of fear here in America than there was when we were kids, and definitely more so than in Europe. I agree that we do too much hand-holding and looking out for the “lowest common consumer” instead of expecting people to have their heads screwed on straight – and the same goes for television.
However, I stand by my opinion that Doctor Who is really not a “kids’ show.”
Culture of Fear
Thanks, John! I think you and MR are leading up to something that has been in play for a number of years: our culture of fear and worry is projected on to children.
While I certainly look out for the very best for children, I do believe the media tries to scare parents – into buying better things, or feeling guilty. For example, it’s a definite “no-no” to give toddlers balloons, obviously, and not watch them. However, if one toy broke as the result of a child playing roughly with it, should everyone panic and over-react by recalling the entire toy line? No. But the media hypes “dangers” that are not always dangerous.
Anyway, I had a point in regards to Dr Who being a children’s show and what we think of that. I am reading, some parts re-reading “Inside the TARDIS: The Worlds of Doctor Who” by James Chapman. Verity Lambert didn’t want the show to be seen as just a children’s show, and wrote:
“I have strong views on the level of intelligence we should be aiming at… ‘Dr Who’ goes out at a time when there is a large child audience but it is intended more as a story for the whole family. And anyway children today are very sophisticated and I don’t allow scripts which seem to talk down to them.” (p. 22)
I think that her statement demonstrates the show could be for children, but that it was primarily thought of as show that children might not want to watch alone. If children watched Dr Who in the context of their home, with their family, certain situtations that might be a bit dark could be dealt with by the parents. As we’ve noted today, children get information from sources other than their parents, when they are probably too immature emotionally to handle “adult” information. But in the 60s, parents had a firmer grip on deciding what their children watched and what they learned. The parents, therefore, would be the judge of what might need discussing after an episode of Dr Who.
Keep it in the Family
If you recall the More than 30 Years in the TARDIS documentary, I think there is a quote from Tom Baker at the beginning which describes the programme as a family show with different levels that the different ages all appreciate. I would definitely agree with that.
Accurate
Yes, I’d say that’s accurate. Of course, I hadn’t actually ever seen More Than 30 Years in the TARDIS when I wrote this, so I couldn’t really have included the Baker quote then. 🙂