From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: In Defense of Davros?
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:40:21 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Aug27.210236.6985@news.iastate.edu> trump@iastate.edu (The Trumpster.) writes:
>In article <15163@umd5.umd.edu> jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...) writes:
>>You seem to be missing out on the subletly of Davros, and the reason why
>>he's one of my favorite Doctor Who villains.

>Then you're also missing out on the sublety of the Master, who wanted to
>turn Earth into the Pickle Planet.

Beg your pardon?  English, please?

>>Sure, he created the Dalek travel machines... but why do you think he
>>created them in the form he did?  One arm, no legs, one eye in the
>>center of the forehead?

>Davros did NOT create the Daleks. The Daleks are his people with the mutations
>accellerated. Thats what they would look like in the future.

Read the posting.  He did not create the Dalek creatures -- just genetically
and behaviorally modified them.  He _did_ create the Dalek casings... and
he created them in his image.

>He found the form digusting and dispicable. He never altered the physical
>structre of the Daleks, only the brain patters.

He was doing "chromosomal modifications", and in "Remembrance" we learn
that he's doing bionic implants of some kind as well.  And as I said, the
form that he liked was not that of the creature, but that of the CASING
which surrounded it... which he designed.

>>Of course, this arrogance that he gave his creations turned back upon
>>him.  Even the Daleks looked down on him as a lesser being.  Deformed.
>>Useless.

>Thats what I said, but he wasn't arrogant. See below

See above.  He also thought that the Daleks would always win every battle
they faced, as he said to the Doctor during the interrogation.  And what
do you call his speech "They talk of democracy, freedom, fairness..."?
Sounds pretty arrogant to me to trash his opponents that way.

>Wrong. The Daleks were not a right or wrong situation. Like I said before, he
>wanted to see what his people were going to look like after the radiation had
>done it's work. He was horrified at his race's prospects, and decided enough
>was enough. Davros was a brilliant man, and he was at WAR. His society and
>people were threatend, and he used the Daleks to fight the war. It was his
>job and duty to create the monster known as the Daleks.

But his motives were hardly selfless.  True, he pictured the Daleks going
on -- but with himself as their Emperor.  Remember, he destroyed the Kaled
city because the politicians were threating him and his Dalek program.  If
he were really concerned about the survival of the Kaleds/Daleks, would he
have wiped out all of the Kaled culture like that?

>That may seem rather cruel hearted, but it's a good strategic decision. His
>people were dying and muatating. He knew what they would become, and saw no
>future for them. I mean, would you pump billions of dollars/pounds into
>something you KNEW for a FACT would fail? The Daleks would survive, the
>Kaleds would die.

So that justifies genocide, and the creation of a race of ruthless monsters?

How about: "Our race will survive if it deserves to survive... but let it
have all our strengths, and all our weaknesses."  That's the words of Davros'
opponent Gharman.  Davros' Daleks are not true Kaleds -- they are extensions
of his ego.  As Gharman himself says, the Dalek project has been perverted
away from the ideals that began it.  Now it exists simply for Davros:
"We -- _I_ -- will go on!"

>Well, that's one of those bits where one writer picks up and distorts another.

Where's the distortion?  He wants the Daleks to survive, with him as their
leader.  This is the same as in Genesis.

>Davros was a VERY intelligent and non-bad guy until the Davison writers took
>him over. He was the victim of his own intelligence.

He still is.  Davros was a brilliant man, who used his brilliance for evil
ends.  He's one of the few villains in Doctor Who capable of an intelligent
conversation.  He was also twisted, ruthless, and filled with hubris. At last
even the survival of his race comes second to his own survival.  But he was
never a one-dimensional evil power-grubbing megalomaniac.  His motivations,
all the way through his final rash decision in "Remembrance", were human.
Motivated by a desire to compensate for his own twistedness.

And that's why I like him.

Jon Blum