What do you think?
Rate this book
Doctor Who Target Books (Numerical Order) #122
Doctor Who-The Massacre
The TARDIS lands in Paris on 19th August 1572 and the Doctor, driven by scientific curiosity, leaves Steven in order to meet and exchange views with the apothecary Charles Preslin. Before he disappears, he warns Steven to stay out of 'mischief, religion and politics'.
Ignoring the Doctor's warning to stay out of trouble, Steven finds himself caught up with a group of Huguenots. The Protestant minority of France is being threatened by the Catholic hierarchy and danger stalks the streets of Paris.
As Steven tries to find his way back to the TARDIS, he is horrified to find that the greatest persecutor of the Huguenots is actually none other than the Doctor himself.
Ignoring the Doctor's warning to stay out of trouble, Steven finds himself caught up with a group of Huguenots. The Protestant minority of France is being threatened by the Catholic hierarchy and danger stalks the streets of Paris.
As Steven tries to find his way back to the TARDIS, he is horrified to find that the greatest persecutor of the Huguenots is actually none other than the Doctor himself.
144 pages, Hardcover
First published February 26, 1966
3 people are currently reading
228 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
December 5, 2018
With all 4 episodes missing from the archive, this is another Hartnell serial that I’m not as overly familiar with.
So with the structure and feel of the narrative of this novelisation being so different from the televised version, it meant that I probably enjoyed reading this more.
The framing narrative of The First Doctor talking to The Timelords about he’s adventure in France during the sixteenth century is different and interesting, unfortunately it means that memorable finale is different.
It leads to the story being more lighthearted and with Steven and The Doctor trying to place exactly what time period they are in by overhearing other people’s conversations gives Lucarotti a chance to teach readers of important historical facts.
Without budget limitations and Hartnell being on holiday for Episode 2, this is a closer telling of what Lucarotti has originally intended to be told on screen.
So with the structure and feel of the narrative of this novelisation being so different from the televised version, it meant that I probably enjoyed reading this more.
The framing narrative of The First Doctor talking to The Timelords about he’s adventure in France during the sixteenth century is different and interesting, unfortunately it means that memorable finale is different.
It leads to the story being more lighthearted and with Steven and The Doctor trying to place exactly what time period they are in by overhearing other people’s conversations gives Lucarotti a chance to teach readers of important historical facts.
Without budget limitations and Hartnell being on holiday for Episode 2, this is a closer telling of what Lucarotti has originally intended to be told on screen.
September 23, 2024
So, this is how I learn that auberge is not, in fact, French for "aubergine".
Lucarotti takes some liberties with his own material, most notably removing the iconic confrontation between the Doctor and Steven at the story's conclusion (more's the pity, really). Plus, despite all the fandom discourse about the Doctor's misdeeds, no one ever talks about him sending Anne Chaplet to Picardie to escape religious persecution. A fate worse than death, if ever there was one.
Lucarotti takes some liberties with his own material, most notably removing the iconic confrontation between the Doctor and Steven at the story's conclusion (more's the pity, really). Plus, despite all the fandom discourse about the Doctor's misdeeds, no one ever talks about him sending Anne Chaplet to Picardie to escape religious persecution. A fate worse than death, if ever there was one.
January 28, 2011
It's a completely different re-imagining of the story, by its original author. Treat it as a companion -- rather than a replacement -- of the original, and you'll be rewarded with some fascinating history, a few action set-pieces, a meeting of doubles that didn't happen on TV...and a surprise prologue/epilogue featuring the 1st Doctor and the Time Lords. John Lucarotti's best novelization of his 3 stories.
March 13, 2020
"The Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve" has remained my favorite of the historical episodes of Doctor Who despite the television tapes still being lost. But Lucarotti's original vision was quite different, and in this novel we get to read what he had intended for this serial.
Before we get into the meat of the story, I feel compelled to say that "The Massacre" is one of those classic Who stories that will blow the mind of anyone who has been largely raised on the last few seasons of the revival program. If you have been at all confused about complaints regarding the lack of nuance and the abundance of propaganda in the show of late, checking out the work of John Lucarotti (and this book in particular) will shed whole new light on how ingenious the show could truly be.
Overflowing with historical information about an important era that many have unfortunately forgotten, you can't help but learn something new from this story. And though this is set during a time of religious bigotry between protestants and catholics, the temptation to take sides and to be preachy was resisted by the writer. Though clearly written with sympathy for the protestant viewpoint, as they were in fact the victims of the mass slaughter of the titular Massacre, the story does a great job weaving the complex political gyrations that occurred on both sides that led to the eventual tragedy, despite efforts to unite catholics peacefully with their protestant brothers and sisters. The catholic King Charles distraught over his fallen protestant comrade Admiral de Coligny is particularly touching in this context, especially if one believes that the King's mother was behind the assassination plot and that Charles himself eventually was convinced to condone de Coligny's ultimate demise. The ridiculous infighting between countrymen who essentially have the same core religious beliefs but differ over the infallibility of the pope in the Holy See is shown to be both comical and horribly sad. The reader feels like another of the Doctor's companions, as the frustration increases over why the two sides can't just get along and the fear mounts while the countdown to the slaughter advances. The end result is that through subtlety and masterful writing, "The Massacre" delivers a gut-punching reminder to modern audiences of how far we've come and how much work we still have yet to do. Today, one may see shades of the infighting between the Balkan Slavs, or the mass genocides in Africa, or the unending "war on terrorism."
Be warned that this story does not spell things out, and it is complex, with as many characters and historical references as a Dostoevsky novel despite its short length. Fans are encouraged to do a little research on their own on this period to get a full appreciation of what is happening, and to me, that is the hallmark of a truly great educational story. "The Massacre" respects the intelligence of its audience, whether pediatric or geriatric.
You can't go wrong with the audiobook version either, with a fantastic performance by the brilliant Peter Purvis, who played Steven in the original broadcast. Though he has definitively French characters speak like British stereotypes, he captures the dynamics of melodrama very well, including the mannerisms of his Doctor.
The book itself expands upon the television adaptation in multiple areas so that where the program seemed sparse the novel fills in the gaps. This has its drawbacks as well as its advantages. For example, the essential mystery that was the basis for the series cliffhangers in episodes 1 through 3 is made irrelevant early on in the book. But in general, I liked the expanded material much more. I think it would have made an excellent entry for the Chibnall-era vision with a modest contemporary budget.
"The Massacre" highlights the troubled genius that is Season 3 of classic Doctor Who. The current BBC would learn a valuable lesson to reference this story as an example of how to improve what I and many other fans consider a failing experiment that has marred the program in the last few years, and to preserve the essence of what made the show a powerhouse of family entertainment for generations.
Before we get into the meat of the story, I feel compelled to say that "The Massacre" is one of those classic Who stories that will blow the mind of anyone who has been largely raised on the last few seasons of the revival program. If you have been at all confused about complaints regarding the lack of nuance and the abundance of propaganda in the show of late, checking out the work of John Lucarotti (and this book in particular) will shed whole new light on how ingenious the show could truly be.
Overflowing with historical information about an important era that many have unfortunately forgotten, you can't help but learn something new from this story. And though this is set during a time of religious bigotry between protestants and catholics, the temptation to take sides and to be preachy was resisted by the writer. Though clearly written with sympathy for the protestant viewpoint, as they were in fact the victims of the mass slaughter of the titular Massacre, the story does a great job weaving the complex political gyrations that occurred on both sides that led to the eventual tragedy, despite efforts to unite catholics peacefully with their protestant brothers and sisters. The catholic King Charles distraught over his fallen protestant comrade Admiral de Coligny is particularly touching in this context, especially if one believes that the King's mother was behind the assassination plot and that Charles himself eventually was convinced to condone de Coligny's ultimate demise. The ridiculous infighting between countrymen who essentially have the same core religious beliefs but differ over the infallibility of the pope in the Holy See is shown to be both comical and horribly sad. The reader feels like another of the Doctor's companions, as the frustration increases over why the two sides can't just get along and the fear mounts while the countdown to the slaughter advances. The end result is that through subtlety and masterful writing, "The Massacre" delivers a gut-punching reminder to modern audiences of how far we've come and how much work we still have yet to do. Today, one may see shades of the infighting between the Balkan Slavs, or the mass genocides in Africa, or the unending "war on terrorism."
Be warned that this story does not spell things out, and it is complex, with as many characters and historical references as a Dostoevsky novel despite its short length. Fans are encouraged to do a little research on their own on this period to get a full appreciation of what is happening, and to me, that is the hallmark of a truly great educational story. "The Massacre" respects the intelligence of its audience, whether pediatric or geriatric.
You can't go wrong with the audiobook version either, with a fantastic performance by the brilliant Peter Purvis, who played Steven in the original broadcast. Though he has definitively French characters speak like British stereotypes, he captures the dynamics of melodrama very well, including the mannerisms of his Doctor.
The book itself expands upon the television adaptation in multiple areas so that where the program seemed sparse the novel fills in the gaps. This has its drawbacks as well as its advantages. For example, the essential mystery that was the basis for the series cliffhangers in episodes 1 through 3 is made irrelevant early on in the book. But in general, I liked the expanded material much more. I think it would have made an excellent entry for the Chibnall-era vision with a modest contemporary budget.
"The Massacre" highlights the troubled genius that is Season 3 of classic Doctor Who. The current BBC would learn a valuable lesson to reference this story as an example of how to improve what I and many other fans consider a failing experiment that has marred the program in the last few years, and to preserve the essence of what made the show a powerhouse of family entertainment for generations.
July 20, 2024
This book is based on his John’s own script and is number 122 in the Target catalogue. No video footage of this story exists though the full audio does due to fan recordings back in the day. The first cover art was done by Tony Masero. It depicts the scene of the TARDIS being burnt at the stake. The second was done by Alister Pearson and highlights the double role of Hartnell as the Doctor and as the Abbot.
This is John’s 3rd historical novilisation, and the one I like least. It’s not that there’s anything wrong with the writing or the story, it’s just the subject matter isn’t a strong interest of mine. I have a similar problem with Ian Marter’s ‘Reign of Terror’, modern European history I just find a bit meh. Whereas Aztecs and Mongol hordes I find much more interesting.
This is the first duplicate role for the Doctor (if you discount the robot copy the daleks made), but not the last. He does the same thing in Enemy of the World. And he’s made into a robot twice, in the Chase and in the Android invasion. These all borrow from the Prisoner of Zenda, yet the story most closely following that book is Androids of Tara and the double role isn’t played by the Doctor. I do love the confusion doubles cause in these stories.
This book is interesting from the chronology of the Doctor’s companions. Dodo never arrives in this book, and she is simply present in The Ark. In the broadcast version Anne isn’t saved and Steven is going to leave because of the Doctors callous attitude. At the next stop that’s where Dodo comes onboard and Steven stays because Dodo looks like Anne (being the same actress helps the similarities😊) This whole scene is not in the book, but the book has Anne and family sent off somewhere safe before the slaughter starts. I’m not actually sure which ending I like better. They both have merit
One thing I did find tiring in this book was the constant repetition of pompous and overlong names. Addmittedly the constaraints of history means the names are given, but I felt they could have been contracted in some way rather than stat the full names as ofen as they were.
Given the subject matter isn’t of major interest too me it’s still an enjoyable read.
This is John’s 3rd historical novilisation, and the one I like least. It’s not that there’s anything wrong with the writing or the story, it’s just the subject matter isn’t a strong interest of mine. I have a similar problem with Ian Marter’s ‘Reign of Terror’, modern European history I just find a bit meh. Whereas Aztecs and Mongol hordes I find much more interesting.
This is the first duplicate role for the Doctor (if you discount the robot copy the daleks made), but not the last. He does the same thing in Enemy of the World. And he’s made into a robot twice, in the Chase and in the Android invasion. These all borrow from the Prisoner of Zenda, yet the story most closely following that book is Androids of Tara and the double role isn’t played by the Doctor. I do love the confusion doubles cause in these stories.
This book is interesting from the chronology of the Doctor’s companions. Dodo never arrives in this book, and she is simply present in The Ark. In the broadcast version Anne isn’t saved and Steven is going to leave because of the Doctors callous attitude. At the next stop that’s where Dodo comes onboard and Steven stays because Dodo looks like Anne (being the same actress helps the similarities😊) This whole scene is not in the book, but the book has Anne and family sent off somewhere safe before the slaughter starts. I’m not actually sure which ending I like better. They both have merit
One thing I did find tiring in this book was the constant repetition of pompous and overlong names. Addmittedly the constaraints of history means the names are given, but I felt they could have been contracted in some way rather than stat the full names as ofen as they were.
Given the subject matter isn’t of major interest too me it’s still an enjoyable read.
February 3, 2021
Another one I know quite well, if not quite as well as the Time Meddler. Another bleak story really for poor Steven this one, though and while I can't watch the TV episodes as all missing I understand that the ending was even harsher on TV than in the book.
Quite a fascinating glimpse of another horrific event in history, but really allows you to see characters on both sides in a somewhat sympathetic fashion, and also see questionable activity on both sides as well, without shying away from mentioning how bad things went in the end.
Some interesting interactions as well, as first instance of a doppelganger as such for the Doctor, and the complications that can ensue from this, and overall a good read.
I do find it ironic that in the end Henri of Navarre became king, given the events this book covers, though he did convert to Catholicism.
It is a shame though that it doesn't introduce Dodo at the end like the TV does, so is a bit of a disjoint between this story and the next.
Quite a fascinating glimpse of another horrific event in history, but really allows you to see characters on both sides in a somewhat sympathetic fashion, and also see questionable activity on both sides as well, without shying away from mentioning how bad things went in the end.
Some interesting interactions as well, as first instance of a doppelganger as such for the Doctor, and the complications that can ensue from this, and overall a good read.
I do find it ironic that in the end Henri of Navarre became king, given the events this book covers, though he did convert to Catholicism.
It is a shame though that it doesn't introduce Dodo at the end like the TV does, so is a bit of a disjoint between this story and the next.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 17, 2025
Since The Massacre (of St. Bartholomew's Eve) is entirely missing from the Doctor Who canon, the Target adaptation is all the more precious, but it's not REALLY hedging all that close to the televised version. And in this case, that's a good thing! John Lucarotti gets to bring his original, undiluted vision to life to what became a Doctor-lite story back in the day. It's still a strong Steven story, but the writer has restored the Doctor's parts, and even has him meet his doppelganger, the Abbot of Amboise in ways that would not have been possible the way the show used to be shot. This is a dark page of French history, and so not unlike The Reign of Terror, but with apologies to Ian, Barbara and Susan, I would call it the BETTER Reign of Terror. The history is complex, but it's still easier to follow than on audio-only, and it's one of Doctor Who's few forays into religion. Bonus points for creating a frame tale with a retired Doctor (I imagined the Seventh, but he's not identified).
December 6, 2023
60th anniversary read through. One of my favorite stories. It is a brilliant historical drama that brings to life a horrible moment in Reformation history. Very well done, historically accurate and interesting. The book is different than the broadcast version which unfortunately only exists as an audio recording. The new companion is weirdly tacked on at the end of the broadcast version, but done as a poignant flashback conversation with Time Lord investigators. Loved it. Next the Doctor will take us to The Ark a million years in the future.
September 25, 2020
One of the best novelisations I have ever read in the Doctor Who universe. I am saddened that there may never be a reconstruction video of the programme due to lack of telesnaps. This would have been a wonderful thing to see.
The novel flows well in the style of a Dr. Who story. I was able to track characters and story development as well as the A and B story arc. I especially like the cover and the references to historical events.
The novel flows well in the style of a Dr. Who story. I was able to track characters and story development as well as the A and B story arc. I especially like the cover and the references to historical events.
January 30, 2023
Doctor Who : The Massacre (1966) by John Lucarotti is the novelisation of the fifth serial of the third season of Doctor Who. Steven is the Doctor’s companion as they land in France in 1572 shortly before a great massacre of Huguenots.
Lucarotti wrote the screenplay for the episode as well as the novelisation. No episodes of the serial still exist.
The Massacre is an interesting idea that doesn’t really work well.
Lucarotti wrote the screenplay for the episode as well as the novelisation. No episodes of the serial still exist.
The Massacre is an interesting idea that doesn’t really work well.
August 9, 2021
The Doctor playing a real part in this does a lot to highlight the weird threads left hanging on television, although I think I do still prefer the dramatic intensity of the ending there - despite being about the massacre, it feels weirdly absent from the book especially since characters we meet are going to die in it.
January 29, 2024
Based on the cover artwork I thought that this would have the Monk who kept following the doctor around in earlier episodes. I was interested in the story. This story takes place just before the "St. Bartholomew's Day massacre" an event in history I don't know much about but I still found the story fascinating. Made me want to read up on the actual event.
April 22, 2021
One of the earlier Doctor Who historicals which is sadly missing from the television archive; this book depicts an adventure of the first Doctor right on the eve of St. Bartholomew's Massacre which took place during the French Wars of Religion between Protestants and Catholics.
June 4, 2023
More of a revision than a retelling, Mr Lucarotti uses his submitted scripts rather than the shooting scripts as the basis for this book. It’s well-written and exciting but it felt like a lot of running about with short interludes of plot thrown in every now and then.
January 29, 2020
BBC audiobook
History can't be changed or shouldn't be changed, either way what happens in the past needs to happen the way it happened. Or does it....
History can't be changed or shouldn't be changed, either way what happens in the past needs to happen the way it happened. Or does it....
April 18, 2022
This one definitely lost my interest for part of the time. I really didn’t want to finish it but I did. It’s an okay Doctor Who helping but I think there are better ones.
November 30, 2022
Boring 😴
March 7, 2023
Although it is not an accurate adaptation of the original serial (it is based on an earlier draft of the serial), this novelization is still a wonderful adventure.
October 18, 2023
It felt like this episode of Doctor Who was hard to put into novel form. It required a lot of visualization on the reader's part so there were parts that weren't quite clear.
February 28, 2024
Had a really hard time getting through this one
April 16, 2016
Between Whovians a question does always come up... if you could watch one of the lost stories which one would it be? The Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve is my answer, every time. After reading this book, I'll have to find another answer: for one, I feel like I've seen the serial now, and two, not sure it would have been a favorite even if it had have been possible to see it.
Don't get me wrong as Doctor Who stories go this is good and quite exciting, really. I think you have to love the First Doctor to appreciate it (and I love every regeneration of our favorite Time Lord) so I would not recommend this to someone who hasn't seen the First in action before, but I don't think someone interested in DW would start by the books, audios or other satellite of the show; the show classic or modern has to be fallen in love with before going for any other medium than television.
The story of The Massacre is not actually, like the title infer, what we see in this story instead we see the days leading to it, that was a surprise since I didn't remember that from what I knew from reading about this serial (have to say, I read this a good while ago and I didn't read the synopsis of the book before beginning it because I'm allergic to "spoilers"... can we call them that when the episodes played before I was born? not sure.). The First Doctor never really meddled with the end game of historical events, I guess in the modern take the massacre would fall under the fix points that the Doctor cannot change, so as exciting and good as the story is, there is fate awaiting the characters you learn to love and with a title like The Massacre it is hard to believe in a happily ever after for everyone.
It's a good book, I think the author did well in adapting his script, but I can't compare... I'm still a little frustrated about that, I so wish episodes still existed, . I didn't think there was a lot of originality in this story, the Doctor and companion get separated, each has his own adventure and off they go at the end having had but little impact in the lives of the people they have encountered... was the episodes exciting? you can't judge from the book, I suspect they probably were a little more than the written word, actors can transform a story from ordinary to exciting and fun although that's just me guessing. The epilogue wants to make us believe that maybe some of the characters future were changed by the Doctor and Steven being there, I doubt it.
Wow, not sure I said a lot about the book or story... This is a very meandering review, that'll teach me to write it at one o'clock in the morning and I can go in a tangent about Doctor Who like any good Whovian.
Final verdict: worth the read and it's out on audiobook too so that's another option... but I rather experience it in my head if I cannot watch the serial and, after all, it is written by the original author so you have to think this was a good adaptation (though I do like the ones written by Terrance Dicks a lot too and I'm sure his take on this would have been very interesting too... sorry, I went off again).
Don't get me wrong as Doctor Who stories go this is good and quite exciting, really. I think you have to love the First Doctor to appreciate it (and I love every regeneration of our favorite Time Lord) so I would not recommend this to someone who hasn't seen the First in action before, but I don't think someone interested in DW would start by the books, audios or other satellite of the show; the show classic or modern has to be fallen in love with before going for any other medium than television.
The story of The Massacre is not actually, like the title infer, what we see in this story instead we see the days leading to it, that was a surprise since I didn't remember that from what I knew from reading about this serial (have to say, I read this a good while ago and I didn't read the synopsis of the book before beginning it because I'm allergic to "spoilers"... can we call them that when the episodes played before I was born? not sure.). The First Doctor never really meddled with the end game of historical events, I guess in the modern take the massacre would fall under the fix points that the Doctor cannot change, so as exciting and good as the story is, there is fate awaiting the characters you learn to love and with a title like The Massacre it is hard to believe in a happily ever after for everyone.
It's a good book, I think the author did well in adapting his script, but I can't compare... I'm still a little frustrated about that, I so wish episodes still existed, . I didn't think there was a lot of originality in this story, the Doctor and companion get separated, each has his own adventure and off they go at the end having had but little impact in the lives of the people they have encountered... was the episodes exciting? you can't judge from the book, I suspect they probably were a little more than the written word, actors can transform a story from ordinary to exciting and fun although that's just me guessing. The epilogue wants to make us believe that maybe some of the characters future were changed by the Doctor and Steven being there, I doubt it.
Wow, not sure I said a lot about the book or story... This is a very meandering review, that'll teach me to write it at one o'clock in the morning and I can go in a tangent about Doctor Who like any good Whovian.
Final verdict: worth the read and it's out on audiobook too so that's another option... but I rather experience it in my head if I cannot watch the serial and, after all, it is written by the original author so you have to think this was a good adaptation (though I do like the ones written by Terrance Dicks a lot too and I'm sure his take on this would have been very interesting too... sorry, I went off again).
Read
October 21, 2007http://nhw.livejournal.com/825455.html[return][return]The novelisation of The Massacre strays some way from the story as broadcast: we experience it as a flashback from the First Doctor's point of view, at a moment when he has temporarily made his peace with the Time Lords and is relaxing in the garden from which he is wrenched for The Five Doctors. Rather than the Doctor disappearing from the scene as he does in the TV story, here he and Steven get completely sucked into the Protestants' attempts to discredit the Doctor's double, the Abbot of Amboise, and to be honest it is all rather confusing; apparently the story had to be rewritten to allow for Hartnell's health (or the unusability of Lucarotti's original script, depending what version you believe). We get the impression that because of the Doctor's interference to save Anne Chaplet, the Time Lords get grumpy with him again. Dodo Chaplet, who appears in the last few minutes of the TV version, does not appear at all here except in that her arrival is referred to by the Time Lords in the epilogue.
December 16, 2008
One of the weaker of the Who historicals, but still pretty interesting.
The episode is gone, so this is your only way to see this story. It's a look at a lesser known historical event, and it's the first Doctor and Stephen, which is an interesting combination. Very rare to see the Doctor and just a male companion.
(Watching the new series you'd start to think guys weren't allowed on the Tardis)
Lots of political intrigue and running around Paris makes up for a pretty weak supporting cast, but the twist of the bad guy was fun and made me wish the TV footage was still around.
The episode is gone, so this is your only way to see this story. It's a look at a lesser known historical event, and it's the first Doctor and Stephen, which is an interesting combination. Very rare to see the Doctor and just a male companion.
(Watching the new series you'd start to think guys weren't allowed on the Tardis)
Lots of political intrigue and running around Paris makes up for a pretty weak supporting cast, but the twist of the bad guy was fun and made me wish the TV footage was still around.
December 14, 2009
First Doctor and Steven. Novelisation of a season 3 story that no longer exists, so while the outline is the same, the finer details are somewhat different. A pure historical. The author does a good job with description and geography. An unusual novelisation in that there's virtually no action but many meetings and near-misses. Note: None of the oft-referenced epilogue is in it (e.g. Dodo is only mentioned in passing). Instead the story is bookended with the first Doctor denying Time Lord allegations that he interfered in events.
March 22, 2011
The Doctor's travels through space and time tend to land him in the more interesting bits of history, which is odd, considering the vast numbers of boring bits where and when the TARDIS could land ... but the interesting bits of history make for better storytelling, I suppose.
The Doctor and Steven materialize in Paris in the midst of court intrigue, plots, counterplots, and religious unrest.
There's an interesting connection to a later companion, but I'll leave that for your own discovery!
The Doctor and Steven materialize in Paris in the midst of court intrigue, plots, counterplots, and religious unrest.
There's an interesting connection to a later companion, but I'll leave that for your own discovery!
November 23, 2022
A wonderfully written novel by John Lucarotti. Due to the nature of the writing process, this is not a straight novelisations of the now lost serial "The Massacre".
However this version of the story is just as moving and true to the time period as the serial. Lucarotti puts a lot of detail into the manuscript, which helps the reader to feel as if they are there with the Doctor and Steven in late 16th century France.
I listened to the audiobook version terrifically read by Peter Purves. The combination of Purves' narration and Lucarotti's writing kept me gripped.
However this version of the story is just as moving and true to the time period as the serial. Lucarotti puts a lot of detail into the manuscript, which helps the reader to feel as if they are there with the Doctor and Steven in late 16th century France.
I listened to the audiobook version terrifically read by Peter Purves. The combination of Purves' narration and Lucarotti's writing kept me gripped.
April 23, 2013
Really enjoyed this, even if it is quite different to the surviving audio. It also does exactly what this sort of work was originally intended for (the shows educational remit) in that my first instinct was to find out more about The Massacre (a period I know very little about in French history. Recommend.
July 29, 2009
The frame story is kind of pointless, and I found the long string of names a bit difficult to differentiate between without strong personalities or "faces" to put to the names. But it was still an enjoyable story, as have almost all of the Doctor Who historicals so far.
April 23, 2011
An excellent example of what a historical Dr. Who should be. This was a pleasure to read, and I hope to one day see the television version. I love the Doctor/Time lord bits and it was such an interesting time location.
March 27, 2014
It was a well written, interesting book. Another horrifying chapter in French history visited by the Doctor. And the Doctor breaks his cardinal rule of non-interference, which he always does, this is just the first time he admits to doing so.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews