Warning the following contains spoilers for the episode Wild Blue Yonder!
Not only is Doctor Who back but with David Tennant and Catherine Tate! In the second special Wild Blue Yonder, we were treated with double the Doctor and Donna as they faced their mysterious doppelgangers after being abandoned by the Tardis on an empty ship at the edge of the universe. The episode was weird and wonderful, with great performances by both Tennant and Tate, and I have been thinking almost non-stop about it since I watched. Because it wasn’t just a good episode of Doctor Who, it was episode that was conceptually interesting, while still being mysterious (what sort of being are the doppelgangers is never truly understood). It was episode that made me think a lot about creation in many different senses and AI.
One of the aspects of the episode that I found very striking is the use of the word “creation” in it. It is not a word that feels very Doctor Who-y or in science fiction. The universe or galaxy seem more obvious choices. But in attempting to figure out where they have ended up, when looking out the window that shows only darkness, the Doctor says to Donna that its “Nothing at the edge of creation.” They are so far from anything that they cannot even see the stars. It is hard for Donna to imagine being at “the edge of everything,” the Doctor explains that currently there are no words that can explain it to her. From this interaction, my head has a lot of thoughts about how to interpret this episode. I am firstly reminded of something that one of my theology lecturers said which is that the language of creation implies a creator. In visualising nothing, the tendency is to see it as darkness because how else does one visualise an absence. There is a sense of play, I think in Davies’ choice to have these doppelgangers emerge from “the absolute nothingness” because it is not creation from nothing.
The Not-Doctor and Not-Donna exist in some sense prior to the Doctor, Donna and the spaceship that they land on. They seem to exist in the darkness in “no time” as potentiality, with no essence, accidents, or form. Despite the nothingness, they are shaped by what comes to the edge. In response to the question of what made them so bad, the Not-Doctor replies “We could hear your lives of war and blood and fury and hate. They made us like this.” Even in this darkness, they were being shaped. It is slightly harrowing image that the only thing that came to this part of the universe was hatred, rather than love or even just starlight. But as Not-Donna replies “Love letters don’t travel very far.” Despite seemingly being able to be anything, they are not constrained by shape, the doppelgangers do not have the ability to be original. They mimic others. They are reliant on others as they are figuring how to be a physical being.
The parallels with Artificial Intelligence are clear as soon as it is revealed to the Doctor and Donna that they are not talking with each other but with the doppelganger. It is revealed because their arms are too long, which is very reminiscent with the way that AI generated art struggled to fully understand the human body. Not-Donna remarks that she is unsure whether having two knees refers to each leg or in total has the feel of one putting in a description and the AI being unsure of how to interpret it. But even before the reveal, the language used by both the Not-Doctor and Not-Donna is slightly stilted, suggesting that they are slowly learning what to say. As the episode goes on, they both learn how to talk and be a physical being. The Doctor says that the difference between the two Donna’s was 0.1%. The episode can be interpreted as the potential challenges of AI. There is evidence that AI systems can be biased because of the datasets that are used. For example, if one does not specify a skin tone, an AI generated image will default to white. A more diverse dataset may help to rectify some of these biases, but the problem is bigger. Things are not created in a vacuum. One may not intend to create a biased machine, but a machine absorbs cultural norms and is a product of cultural norms. Hille Hake wrote that “science and technologies as social practices that need to be justified in light of the normative framework.” Technologies that do not have ethical scrutiny are not neutral, they will reflect the cultures that they are created. There is a need to continually reflect on what values and norms are being respected. Does it acknowledge human are more than just a utility? But this space of nothing in Doctor Who is not only absent of any stars, but it also lacks a normative framework to guide the act of creation. One of the key questions for AI, like any technology, is what is its purpose or why is it being made? This is helpful because it reminds one that it needs to be justified. There remains the problems of unforeseen consequences of technology but considering the intended telos can be a helpful beginning for continuous reflection. It is notable that the Doctor remarks that initially they existed in this part of the universe with no purpose and from what they heard they decided they want to join the universe’s “vicious games.” While it is not exactly the same, there is slight parallel with the gap in Donna’s mind in the previous episode. Donna lacks the memories of her time with the Doctor, which is a kind of absence. But even in that state, the Doctor continued to shape her. She gave her lottery winnings to charity because she felt that it was what the Doctor would do. The Not-Doctor remarks as he is learning about shape the “When something is gone, it keeps existing.” Even when the Doctor is gone, his goodness, his love still existed in Donna. She had the Doctor’s norms even in his absence.
There is also a sense that the mysterious doppelgangers are a representation of the future. I described them earlier as seeming to exist initially as potentiality. At present, this is also the state of the future, it exists in potentiality. It can be almost anything. In other words, it lacks shape and definition. Not-Donna says that the consequence of being embodied is that “It limits.” Regardless of how idealistically one envisions the future, one cannot escape the reality that being created means being limited. As one moves towards the future, the question is how we move towards the future. In the ship there is a robot that they refer to as Jimbo who is moving slowly down the corridor. For most of the episode, the purpose of Jimbo is unclear but after discovering that the doppelgangers can learn more from the Doctor and Donna when they are thinking fast. They don’t understand slowness. Jimbo has been programmed by the captain before she committed suicide to move slowly in order to destroy the ship and the doppelgangers. This was the opposite of Mark Zuckerberg’s motto of “Move fast and break things.” There is a need for intentionality, the robot moved slowly with purpose and was able to save the day. If we just head forward into the future with no regard, we may just end up destroying it. This is interesting to note in a show where the protagonist is known to run from one thing to the next. As the Doctor admits “We stand here now on the edge of creation, a creation which I devastated. So, yes, I keep running.” The Doctor doesn’t look back because of what he would be faced with. On one level, this is unlikely to ever fully change without undoing the premise of Doctor Who as explorer of time and space. But at the same time, Donna was seen as someone who was destroyed by her relationship with the Doctor and yet it is shown that what seems impossible and tragic can change. In encountering Donna again there was the possibility for Donna to be made whole again. She is a new creation.
