This
episode, one of my favorites, is the perfect opener for Series Three.
It is a far better first episode than those that opened the first two
seasons (in my opinion). I think it strikes just the right tone. It
is one of the more light-hearted episodes, and yet the Doctor faces
an enemy as dangerous as any other. The plasmavore is all the more
sinister because she takes the form of a little old lady—but more
on uncanny human resemblances in a later post. Putting the dear,
sweet blood-sucker aside for a moment, I love that the alien race
that dominates this story, the Judoon, are among the better species
we have encountered. I hate the idea that an entire species is
worthless by its very nature, fit only to destroy and be destroyed,
and this is often the concept given in Doctor Who.
The Cybermen and the Dalek are, simply because of what they are,
thoroughly evil. This, by the way, is one of the problems I have with
Tolkien's world: orcs are fit to be wiped from the face of the earth
like mosquitoes or flies, in spite of the fact that they are rational
beings who and think and talk. They are portrayed in Lord
of the Rings as beyond
redemption. And here again Doctor Who
rises to a new level: there are episodes in which the Doctor has to
acknowledge that even his worst enemies, the Dalek, are capable of
moral awareness and are fit to be saved rather than destroyed. All
that to say, I like the Judoon. They are disciplined, moral, and
just. Their justice is harsh, but they do nothing out of personal
malice. They are orderly, objective ministers of the law.
The
other reason I adore this episode is, of course, its christological
climax. The Doctor is called upon to sacrifice himself over and over
again throughout the course of the show, and he rushes to offer his
life as readily in exchange for that of one person as for the entire
planet earth. I'll blog more specifically about what I mean by
“christology” and all of its implications some other time. For
now, I just want to luxuriate in the beautiful sorrow of the crisis
in “Smith and Jones”: the Doctor gives his last drop of blood to
save half of humanity; Martha gives her last breath to save him. And
what makes this mutual sacrifice apart from real ones is that, by so
doing, they save each other. Neither ends up dying, but each is saved
in the other.
This
is very like an idea that is central to my academic work: the idea is
“co-inherence,” and it is the core teaching of the poet whose
works I study, Charles Williams. You might want to check out my other
blog, The
Oddest Inkling, which is dedicated to his work. He was a
peculiar fellow who mixed Christianity with the occult and who
gathered disciples around him to practice his particular version of
sanctity.
Co-inherence
is the idea that we are all members of one body, all part of one
another, and all able to live in and for each other. Co-inherence
teaches that Christ’s risen life is in each person who accepts Him;
therefore, we can share in the divine interrelationship of the
Trinity and live as members of one another.
In
1939, Charles Williams founded an “order” called the Companions
of the Co-inherence and laid down rules for them to follow as they
practiced co-inherence in action, also known as the Doctrine of
Substitution or the Way of Exchange. These exchanges are based on the
simple fact that everyone participates in physical exchange (I am
dependent on the farmers who produce my food; those who go to war die
in the place of those who stay home and for whom peace is purchased,
etc). We can choose to see these personal, social, and political
contacts as blessings and practice co-inherence in the strength of
Christ’s resurrections. We can make compacts to bear one another’s
burdens. We can voluntarily substitute ourselves for others and
“carry their burdens” quite literally, even though those burdens
may be spiritual, emotional, or medical. These principles can work
among the living in any space and time, and also with the dead and
the unborn.
The
clearest explication of “The Doctrine of Substituted Love” occurs
in Williams' novel Descent
into Hell.
One character is terrified of meeting her doppleganger.
Someone else offers to carry her fear for her. This happens, and she
is able to meet her double fearlessly.
The
ending of “Smith and Jones,” then, is an example of The Way of
Exchange in fiction. The Doctor chooses to die in exchange for the
lives of 3 billion people; Martha chooses to die in exchange for the
Doctor. His exchange works: no one on earth is killed by the
souped-up MRI. Her exchange works: the Doctor is revived by her last
breath. And the blessing that results from Martha's sacrifice is that
his resuscitation results in hers, so the circle is closed: the
Doctor saves the people, Martha saves the Doctor, so then the Doctor
saves Martha without sacrificing himself again.
And
they all live happily ever after.....?
5 comments:
Thanks for another thoughtful review.
A quibble re LOTR, however: Perhaps orcs are the equivalent of a sub-race of fallen angels ("sub" because "mal-formed" by Sauron in imitation of elves, as Gandalf says).
Your comment also raises a most interesting question: is anything worthy of condemnation by virtue of its nature? To which we might reply: Of course--humanity, by virtue of its rebellion against its Creator and the rest of his creation. But God ..., which (apparently) cannot be said about Sauron, Melkor, or orcs. Saruman, on the other hand, "was once ..." (so Frodo) and is therefore(?) offered repentance and redemption.
And there are two further gaps in our knowledge about Middle Earth. We do not know: (1) whether or not orcs (or any individual orc), when offered the opportunity to repent, would respond positively (as, e.g., Rahab among the Canaanites), or scorn the offerer (and offering); and (2) whether or not any orcs did (in fact) repent.
It is also striking that "all of the works of Sauron" were fit only for destruction (i.e., not merely the orcs).
I'm not arguing (honest!), just thinking along lines prompted by your comment, especially since it resonates with many people's response to the divine decree of execution upon the Canaanites (even to their cattle).
Thanks again--you make me think!
Thank you, Fred! Yes, good points. The orcs function as embodiments of JRRT's theology about evil: that evil has no independent existence and cannot create anything. Evil can only take good things and twist them. You raise a good point: if an orc had been offered a chance (like Gollum), would he have repented? Your OT parallels are good ones, too. Thanks for the thoughts.
The co-inherence idea - well the idea wasn't new, since you can find a number of biblical passages exemplifying this quality of fellowship. Sometimes it can be spontaneous, sometimes needs to be deliberate. In a real sense for me, when someone has taken it on to bear my burden, even in a tiny gesture, it can have an exponential beneficial effect on my faith....
Fun blog!
Thanks for the comment, Dominic! Yes, the idea is Biblical -- but Charles Williams often pushes it to strange extremes. Have you practiced Exchange with anyone? How did it work out?
Post a Comment