Introduction from Pinnacle's "Doctor Who" books
Scott Stone
(as transcribed from my yellowish copy of "Doctor Who and the Loch Ness
Monster" by Terrance Dicks, copyright 1976 by Terrance Dicks and Robert
Banks Stewart. Introduction copyrighted 1979 by Harlan Ellison.)
-------------------------------------------------
Introducing Doctor Who
amenities performed by Harlan Ellison
They could not have been more offended, confused, enraged and
startled....There was a moment of stunned silence...and then an eruption
of angry voices from all over the fifteen-hundred-person audience. The
kids in their Luke Skywalker pajamas (cobbled up from older brother's
castoff karate *gi*) and the retarded adults spot-welded into their
Darth Vader freight-masks howled with fury. But I stood my ground, there
on the lecture platform at the World Science Fiction Convention, and I
repeated the heretical words that had sent them into animal hysterics:
"_Star Wars_ is adolescent nonsense; _Close Encounters_ is
obscurist drivel; _Star Trek_ can turn your brains into puree of bat
guano; and the greatest science fiction series of all time is _Doctor
Who_! And I'll take you all on, one-by-one or all in a bunch to back it
up!"
Auditorium monitors moved in, truncheons ready to club down anyone
foolish enough to try jumping the lecture platform, and finally there
was relative silence. And I head scattered voices screaming from the
back of the room,"Who?" And I said, "Yes. Who!"
(It was like that old Abbott and Costello routine: Who's on first?
No, Who's on third; What's on first.)
After a while we got it all sorted out and they understood that
when I said Who I didn't mean *whom*, I meant Who....Doctor Who...the
most famous science fiction character on British television. The
renegade Time Lord, the far traveler through Time and Space, the sword
of justice from the planet Gallifrey, the scourge of villians and
monsters the galaxy over. The one and only, the incomparable, the
bemusing and bewildering Doctor Who, the humanistic defender of Good and
Truth, whose exploits put to shame those of Kimball Kinnison, Captain
Future and pantywaist nerds like Han Solo and Luke Skywalker.
My hero! Doctor Who!
For the American reading (and television-viewing) audience (and in
this sole, isolated case I hope they're one and the same) _Doctor Who_
is a new factor in the equation of fantastic literature. Since 1963 the
Doctor and his exploits have been a consistent element of British
culture. But we're only now being treated to the wonderful universes of
Who here in the States. For those of us who were exposed to both the TV
series on BBC and the long series of _Doctor Who_ novels published in
Great Britian, the time of solitary proselytizing is at an end. All we
need to do now is thrust a Who novel into the hands of the
unknowlegable, or drag the unwary to a TV set and turn it on as the good
Doctor goes through his paces. That's all it takes. Try this book and
you'll understand.
I envy you your first exposure to this amazing conceit. And I wish
you the same delight I felt when Michael Moorcock, the finest fantasist
in the English-speaking world, sat me down in front of his set in
London, turned on the telly, and said, "Now be quiet and just watch."
That was in 1975. And I've been hooked on "Doctor Who" ever since.
Understand: I despise television (having written it for sixteen years)
and I spend much of my time urging people to bash in their picture tubes
with Louisville Sluggers, to free themselves of the monster of coaxial
cable. And so, you must perceive that I speak of something utterly
extraordinary and marvelous when I suggest you watch the "Doctor Who"
series in whatever syndicated slot your local station has scheduled it.
You must recognize that I risk all credibility for furture exhortations
by telling you *this* TV viewing will not harm you...will, in fact,
delight and uplift you, stretch your imagination, tickle your
risibilities, flense your intellect of all lesser visual sf
affectations, improve your disposition and clean up your zits. What I'm
saying here, case you're a *yotz* who needs things codified simply and
directly, is that "Doctor Who" is the apex, the pinnacle, the tops, the
Louvre Museum, the tops, the Colisuem, and other etcetera.
Now to give you a few basic facts about the Doctor, to brighten
your path through this nifty series of lunatic novels.
He is a Time Lord: one of that immensely wise and powerful
super-race of alien beings who, for centuries unnumbered, have watched
and studied all of Time and Space with intellects (as H.G. Wells put it)
vast and cool and unsympathetic. Their philosophy was never to interfere
in the affairs of alien races, merely to watch and wait.
But one of their number, known only as the Doctor, found such
inaction anathema. As he studied the interplay of great forces in the
cosmos, the endless wars and invasions, the entropic conflict between
Good and Evil, the rights and lives of a thousand alien life-forms
debased and brutalized, the wrongs left unrighted...he was overcome by
the compulsion *to act*! He was a renegade, a misfit in the name of
justice.
And so he stole a TARDIS and fled.
Ah, yes. The TARDIS. That most marvelous device for spanning the
Time-lines and traversing all of known/unknown Space. The name is an
acronym for Time And Relative Dimensions In Space. Marvelous! An amazing
machine that can change shape to fit in with any locale in which it
materializes. But the TARDIS stolen from his fellow Time Lords by the
Doctor was in for repairs. And so it was frozen in the shape of its
first appearance: a British police call box. Those of you who have been
to England may have seen such call boxes. (There are very few of them
currently, because the London "bobbies" now have two-way radio in their
patrol cars; but before the advent of that communications system the
tall, dark blue street call box--something like our old fashioned wooden
phone booth--was a familiar sight in the streets of London. If a police
officer needed assistance he could call in directly from such a box, and
if the station house wanted to get in touch with a copper they could
turn on the big blue light atop the box and its flashing would attract a
"bobby.")
Further wonder: the outward size of the TARDIS does not reveal its
relative size *inside*. The size of a phone booth outwardly, it is
enormous within, holding many sections filled with the Doctor's
super-scientific equipment.
Unfortunately, the stolen TARDIS needed more repairs than just the
fixing of its shape-changing capabilities. Its steering mechanisim was
also wonky, and so the Doctor could never be certain that the
coordinates he set for time and place of materializing would be correct.
He might set a course for the planet Karn...and wind up in Victorian
London. He migh wish to relax at an intergalactic pleasure resort...and
pop into existence in Antarctica. He might lay a course for the deadly
gold mines of Voga...and appear in Renaissance Italy.
It makes for a chancy existence, but the Doctor takes it all
unflinchingly. As do his attractive female traveling companions, whose
liasons with the Doctor are never sufficiently explicated for those of
us with a nasty, suspicious turn of mind.
The Doctor *looks* human and, apart from his quirky way of
thinking, even *acts* human most of the time. But he is a Time Lord, not
a mere mortal. He has two hearts, a stable body temperature of 60
[degrees], and--not to stun you too much--he's approximately 750 years
old. Or at least he was that age when the first of he 43 _Doctor Who_
novels was written. God (or Time Lords) only know how old he is now!
Only slightly less popular than the good Doctor himself are his
arch-foes and the distressing alien monsters he battles through the
pages of these wild books and in phosphor-dot reality on your TV
screens. They seem endless in their variety: the Vardans, the Oracle,
Fendahl, the virus swarm of the Purpose, The Master, the Tong of the
Black Scorpion, the evil brain of Morbius, the mysterious energy force
known as the Mandragora Helix, the android clone Kraals, the Zygons, the
Cybermen, the Ice Warriors, the Autons, the spore beast called the
Krynoid and--most deadly and menacing of them all--the robot threat of
the Daleks.
Created by mad Davros, the great Kaled scientist, the
pepper-pot-shaped Daleks made such an impression in England when they
were first introduced into the series that they became a cultural
artifact almost immediately. Movies have been made about them, toys have
been manufactured of Daleks, coloring books, Dalek candies, soaps,
slippers, Easter eggs and even special Dalek fireworks. They rival the
Doctor for the attention of a fascinated audience and they have been
brought back again and again during the fourteen years the series has
perpetuated itself on BBC television; and their shiveringly pleasurable
manifestations have not been confined just to England and America.
Doctor Who and the Daleks have millions of rabid fans in over thirty
countries around the world.
Like the three ficitional characters *every* nation knows--Sherlock
Holmes, Tarzan and Superman--Doctor Who seems to have a universal
appeal.
Let me conclude this paean of praise with these thoughts: hating
_Star Wars_ and "Star Trek" is not a difficult chore for me. I recoil
from that sophomoric species of creation that excuses its simplistic
cliche structure and homage to the transitory (as does does _Star Wars_)
as violently as I do from that which sententiously purports to be deep
and intellectual when it is, in fact, superficial self-conscious twaddle
(as does "Star Trek"). This not to say that I am an ivory tower
intellect whose doubledome can only support Proust or Descartes. When I
was a little kid, and was reading everything I could lay hands on, I
read the classics with joy, but enjoyed equally those works I've come to
think of as "elegant trash": the Edgar Rice Burroughs novels, The
Shadow, Doc Savage, Conan, comic books and Uncle Wiggly. They taught me
a great deal of what I know about courage and truth and ethic in the
world.
To that list I add _Doctor Who_. His adventures are sunk to the
hips in humanisim, decency, solid adventures and simple good reading.
They are not classics, make no mistake. They can never touch the
illuminative level of Dickens or Mark Twain or Kafka. But they are solid
entertainment based on an understanding of Good and Evil in the world.
They say to us, "You, too, can be Doctor Who. You, like the Doctor, can
stand up for that which is bright and bold and true. You can shape the
world, if you'll only go and try."
And they do it in the form of *all* great literature...the cracking
good, well-plotted adventure yarn. They are direct lineal heirs to the
adventures of Rider Haggard and Talbot Mundy, of H.G. Wells and Jules
Verne, of Mary Shelley and Ray Bradbury. They are worth your time.
And if you give yourself up to the Doctor's winsome ways, he will
take substance and reality in your imagination. For that reason, for the
inestimable goodness and delight in every _Doctor Who_ adventure, for
the benefits he proffers, I lend my name and my urging to read and watch
him.
I don't think you'll do less than thank me for shoving you down
with this book in your hands and telling you...here's Who. Meet the
Doctor.
The pleasure is all mine. And all yours, kiddo.
Harlan Ellison
Los Angeles
----------------------------------------------------
The next time someone slags you for your love of Doctor Who, or if you
start to wonder why you like the good Doctor in the first place, just
remember Ellison's words. Eighteen years down the line, and every last
word is still true.
Now, if you'll pardon me, I need a drink, and then I'll think I'll write
something about Doctor Who.
__
M.L.Stone,
that very nice geezer, who's just nutty enough to have re-typed the
entire introduction so no one misses out....
Darkness
M.L. Stone:
[bits of a Doctor Who introduction by Harlan Ellison]
Gotta love that quote.
> "_Star Wars_ is adolescent nonsense; [...]
I have to say that I can't see Star Wars being any more adolescent nonsense
than Doctor Who (it just depends on which bits you're looking at). But,
anyway...
> Understand: I despise television (having written it for sixteen years)
> and I spend much of my time urging people to bash in their picture tubes
> with Louisville Sluggers, to free themselves of the monster of coaxial
> cable.
This I like. There are, IMO, some television shows that are worthwhile, but
they are few and far between.
> But one of their number, known only as the Doctor, found such
> inaction anathema. As he studied the interplay of great forces in the
> cosmos, the endless wars and invasions, the entropic conflict between
> Good and Evil, the rights and lives of a thousand alien life-forms
> debased and brutalized, the wrongs left unrighted...he was overcome by
> the compulsion *to act*! He was a renegade, a misfit in the name of
> justice.
> And so he stole a TARDIS and fled.
Not exactly. He didn't start to [want to] get involved until after he had
left. We see his interest in interfering grow in Hartnell's era. At the
start, he most definitely did *not* want to interfere.
> Unfortunately, the stolen TARDIS needed more repairs than just the
> fixing of its shape-changing capabilities. Its steering mechanisim was
> also wonky, and so the Doctor could never be certain that the
> coordinates he set for time and place of materializing would be correct.
I could be wrong, but I could swear that the whole not knowing where they
would end up next was because someone had buggered around with the
controls, so the relative coordinates were lost.
[about the Doctor's enemies]
> the robot threat of the Daleks.
Argh! They're *NOT* ROBOTS!!!
> I recoil
> from that sophomoric species of creation that excuses its simplistic
> cliche structure and homage to the transitory (as does does _Star Wars_)
"Homage to the transitory"?
Perhaps I'm just being dense, but could someone explain what that is
supposed to mean?
I happen to like Star Wars (minus the Ewok drivel), myself.
M.L. Stone, herself:
> Eighteen years down the line, and every last word is still true.
Well, I quibble.
Quibble.
See?
Darkness
Charles Daniels
Darkness <dark...@netgate.net> wrote:
: M.L. Stone:
: Not exactly. He didn't start to [want to] get involved until after he had
: left. We see his interest in interfering grow in Hartnell's era. At the
: start, he most definitely did *not* want to interfere.
: I could be wrong, but I could swear that the whole not knowing where they
: would end up next was because someone had buggered around with the
: controls, so the relative coordinates were lost.
: [about the Doctor's enemies]
: Argh! They're *NOT* ROBOTS!!!
I would like to point out Ellison wrote this late '79 or early 80
before he had a VCR and before Doctor Who vid releases, and looking
at reference material from pre-1981 you will be amazed how many source
claim Daleks are robots, that history of Doctor Who he described,
the books and reference materials bnever wanted to bug about with
"Well at FIRST he didn't really want to get involved lkike this unless he
had to and it wasn't ALWAYS random but.."
Scott Stone
Quibble.
Since Ellison referred to _Star Wars_ as being "...a homage to the
transitory", perhaps he was just in a cranky mood and was looking for a
more literate way to say "flash-in-the-pan". Since he wrote the
introduction to the Pinnacle books in 1979, he might have believed that
_Star Wars_ was just that: a passing fad, a one-hit wonder.
Or maybe he just wished he would've written it. Nah.
"Homage to the transitory" might be more fitting for _Jedi_ (I'm
thinking of dancing primative Muppets), while "...simplistic cliche
structure..." would pertain to _Star Wars_. The film was cliched, the
dialogue was really hokey at times, and it was a idealistic and simple
story. But how many times have I seen it? None of yer business. (For the
record, yes I saw the anniversary re-release, and I even watched bits
and pieces of the trilogy on USA Networks on Christmas. Sad fan?
Uh-huh.) And how many Millennium Falcons and Kenner figures did I have?
Umm...I'll tell you later. My point, as usual, is on the top of my head.
I feel it's worthy to note that through the years, my _Star Wars_
collection has shrunk to nil, the few books on "Star Trek" are
collecting dust, and the only thing that has survived my youth (and has
grown, even) is Doctor Who. In a way, I s'pose my meager example proves
Ellison's argument: the greatest sciene fiction series of all time is
Doctor Who! (But I am still prone to bouts of adolescent nonsense and
puree of bat guano between the ears.)
Quibble away, my dear Darkness. I'm one for wobbling, myself.
__
M.L.Stone,
that very nice geezer, who is a bit wobbly indeed....
Martin Severin
Sometimes the best defense is a (somewhat) literate offense. If only the
statements made regarding Daleks being robots, the cause of the TARDIS'
wonky navigation, and the Doctor's true reason for leaving Gallifrey
could be corrected, then this introduction would be perfect to wave
under the nose of any condescending Star Trek or Star Wars fan.
Especially the ones with the latex Vulcan ears and the baggy pyjamas on.
"I am tired, I am weary, I could sleep for a thousand years.
Reuben Herfindahl
I'm sure I'm not the first to notice but, Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
simple mistake.
Reuben Herfindahl
reu...@reuben.net
Saulchurch
>this introduction would be perfect to wave
>under the nose of any condescending Star Trek or Star Wars fan.
>Especially the ones with the latex Vulcan ears and the baggy pyjamas on.
It wouldn't work. Star Trek fans "know" that Star Trek is better, Star Wars
fans "know" that Star Wars is better. And maybe, for them, it is. But we, of
course, know they're wrong.
Even those of us with the long scarfs or striped pajama pants on...
-Ben Varkentine
"I don't wanna be hip & cool, I don't wanna play by the rules. Not under the
thumb of the cynical few, or laden down by the doom crew. Don't crack up, bend
your brain, see both sides..."-Howard Jones
Steven K. Manfred
The text descriptions of him inside also changed it to Tom's Doctor.
Steve Manfred
stev...@pressenter.com
Michael S. Tumilty
Saulchurch wrote in message
<19971230025...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
[snip]
>As well, "ginger beer" becomes "ginger ale" & "jelly babies"
>becomes "jelly beans".
>
Arrrgh! Blasphemy! Blasphemy! And I was just on
the verge of forgiving them for saying 'Doctor Who
is a zany sort of guy'* on the back cover.
-Erin
*Well, it was something to that effect.
Saulchurch
> Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
>Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
>just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
>me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
>simple mistake.
It wasn't a mistake-the Doctor in the book is clearly Tom as well, the same
goes for the other Jon stories in the Pinnacle books. Right or wrong, they
didn't want to explain regeneration in a truncated series of books intended to
introduce the Dr to the American audience for pulp fiction, like the Remo
Williams books. So minor rewriting changes were made in the character
descriptions. As well, "ginger beer" becomes "ginger ale" & "jelly babies"
becomes "jelly beans".
Chris Krisocki
Actually, IIRC, Malcolm Hulke describes the Doctor in this book as
having curly hair, so maybe the American editors saw this and
automatically assumed it was the fourth? As for not wanting to introduce
regeneration, well, Day of the Daleks was the first book they did and
that was a third Doctor story...
Will Cameron
On 30 Dec 1997 02:59:05 GMT, saulc...@aol.com (Saulchurch) wrote:
>> Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
>>Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
>>just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
>>me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
>>simple mistake.
>
>It wasn't a mistake-the Doctor in the book is clearly Tom as well, the same
>goes for the other Jon stories in the Pinnacle books. Right or wrong, they
>didn't want to explain regeneration in a truncated series of books intended to
>introduce the Dr to the American audience for pulp fiction, like the Remo
>Williams books. So minor rewriting changes were made in the character
>descriptions. As well, "ginger beer" becomes "ginger ale" & "jelly babies"
>becomes "jelly beans".
I don't get this ref. to Remo, could you expand further?
- Will.
----
Will Cameron
wcam...@tiac.net
www.tiac.net/users/wcameron/index.htm
To Respond Via E-Mail, Please Remove The Word SPAM?NO!.
from my E-Mail Address.
Will Cameron
On 30 Dec 1997 02:59:05 GMT, saulc...@aol.com (Saulchurch) wrote:
>> Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
>>Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
>>just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
>>me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
>>simple mistake.
>
>It wasn't a mistake-the Doctor in the book is clearly Tom as well, the same
>goes for the other Jon stories in the Pinnacle books. Right or wrong, they
>didn't want to explain regeneration in a truncated series of books intended to
>introduce the Dr to the American audience for pulp fiction, like the Remo
>Williams books. So minor rewriting changes were made in the character
>descriptions. As well, "ginger beer" becomes "ginger ale" & "jelly babies"
>becomes "jelly beans".
Actually, let me rephrase that before Chuin comes along and folds me
up into a 1 by 1 by 1 inch box.....
Could you explain how replacing Tom in the Jon books relates to the
Remo Williams/The Destroyer books? I seem to recall most of the books
before jumping to Golden Eagle there was some minor references to the
background of Sinanju, etc....
And if your a fan and have read the newest books, how do they fare
having now been given to the Golden Eagle stable of writers (Now that
Will Murry's been out of there for about 6 books now I think...)
Reuben Herfindahl
Steven K. Manfred wrote:
>
> Reuben Herfindahl wrote:
> >
> > Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
> > just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
> > me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
> > simple mistake.
> >
> > reu...@reuben.net
>
> The text descriptions of him inside also changed it to Tom's Doctor.
>
> Steve Manfred
> stev...@pressenter.com
A quick run back to my books refreshed my memory. Thanks. I suppose I
should confess I haven't re-read any of the Pinnacle books since 1985.
I guess I had forgotten all the joy I was missing ;-)
Reuben
reu...@reuben.net
Reuben Herfindahl
Opps! My memory served me wrong I was remembering the intro to the
book, not the cover.
The intro for the Doctor goes something like:
The Fourth Doctor
This episode features the fourth Doctor Who, who has survived three
reincarnations. The long trailing scarf, the floppy wide brimmed hat,
the mop of curly hair and the wide eyed stare--all these are the obvious
trademarks of the fourth Doctor Who. Along with a delightful mix of
personality traits--genius and clown, hero and bufoon--the fourth Doctor
Who combines the best of all who preceded him.
I don't think I'll even begin to tear that apart. Let's leave it for
what it is: a bad introduction by someone who is only remotely familiar
with Who and is very T. Baker biased.
btw. Just so I can share my screw up with those of you that don't have
the book a jpeg of the cover can be found at
http://205.213.74.227/dino.jpeg
Reuben
reu...@reuben.net
P.S. Digging out the book again was quite fun. It was one of 2 books I
owned at age 10 and I must have loved it to death. I had written all
over the inside and had even used it as an autograph book at one time
(the inside back cover is signed by several Minnesota politicans,
including one that is currently running for Governor). It's great to
dredge up old memories sometimes, and that's part of what I love about
RADW. Finding you weren't the only fan to lay out all your Target books
on the floor and photograph them is quite a relief.
Guy Clapperton
In article <19971230025...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
saulc...@aol.com (Saulchurch) wrote:
> > Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
> >Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess
> they
> >just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
> >me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
> >simple mistake.
>
> It wasn't a mistake-the Doctor in the book is clearly Tom as well, the
> same
> goes for the other Jon stories in the Pinnacle books. Right or wrong,
> they
> didn't want to explain regeneration in a truncated series of books
> intended to
> introduce the Dr to the American audience for pulp fiction, like the
> Remo
> Williams books. So minor rewriting changes were made in the character
> descriptions. As well, "ginger beer" becomes "ginger ale" & "jelly
> babies"
> becomes "jelly beans".
>
>
> -Ben Varkentine
> "I don't wanna be hip & cool, I don't wanna play by the rules. Not
> under the
> thumb of the cynical few, or laden down by the doom crew. Don't crack
> up, bend
> your brain, see both sides..."-Howard Jones
>
>
Interestingly, WH Allen also used Tom on some of the covers of 'The
Crusaders' in hardback in the early 1980s.
Mind you, they didn't do anything over-clever like change the descriptions
as well...
Regards
Guy
http://www.clapperton.co.uk
Saulchurch
wcam...@tiac.AMSPAY.net (Will Cameron) wrote, on Dec 30, 1997 01:35 EST:
> Could you explain how replacing Tom in the Jon books relates to the
>Remo Williams/The Destroyer books?
I believe they were trying to keep the DW line as simple as possible-not easy
in any case, and more so if you have a series of less than ten books in which
the lead character chages bodies mid-through. I think the Pinnacle line was
designed *not* so much to tie in to the series, but to introduce the Doctor as
a *book* series character to the same audience that reads The Destroyer books
(An audience that, they presumed, was not familiar with the series). Those who
enjoy adventure, "men's fiction", mystery, or whatever you want to call it. I
only used that as an example-there isn't any other relation that I know of.
Presumably, if the line had been a success, there would have been as many
Pinnacle DW books as there are Remo novels (And as someone who used to manage a
used bookstore, let me tell you, there are a $&#* of a lot!)
Charles Daniels
Reuben Herfindahl <reu...@reuben.net> wrote:
: I'm sure I'm not the first to notice but, Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
: Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon. I guess they
: just must have thought Tom was more marketable to the dumb masses (like
: me at age 10) who bought the books, or perhaps (I doubt it) they made a
: simple mistake.
I have a Pinnacle copy of The Dinosaur Invasion. It does not feature
Tom Baker, or Jon Pertwee, in fact all it has is a T-Rex fighting a
rocket in front of Big Ben.
David J Howe
Guy Clapperton wrote:
>
> Interestingly, WH Allen also used Tom on some of the covers of 'The
> Crusaders' in hardback in the early 1980s.
>
> Mind you, they didn't do anything over-clever like change the descriptions
> as well...
Those books were published by White Lion and not by W H Allen.
David
Sam Nelson
Reuben Herfindahl wrote:
>
> I'm sure I'm not the first to notice but, Pinnacle's Dr. Who and the
> Dinosaur Invasion has Tom as the Doctor on front, not Jon.
Yes, but does it have a pteranodon saying "Klakk"?
That's the impotant thing. ;)
--
SAM NELSON
Guy Clapperton
I stand corrected. Hope you're well.
Regards
Guy