This study aims to consider how science fiction television series Doctor Who (Sydney Newman, 1963-1989, 2005) has undergone changes in representations of ethnicity since 2005. The Doctor, who is a representation of immigrants from the very beginning, was embodied in white, heterosexual men until the 11th season. Last season is the first season since 1963 when a woman is the Doctor. In addition, this season, the Doctor's three companions are Ryan who is a black man, Yaz who is a Pakistani-British woman and Graham who is a middle-aged white man mourning his wife Grace who was black. In this study, it is aimed to analyze the features that make this season different from the others in terms of representations of ethnicity by using visual data analysis techniques and Smith's national identity theory. In this study, it has been proposed that the previous episodes of the Doctor Who television series were problematic in case of representations of ethnicity, and the ongoing representations of ethnicity are changing under the leadership of the female Doctor and his ethnically diverse companions during the era of Chris Chibnall and the episodes are examined using this framework.

“Past tense and future tense

What could have been and what has been

It always points to the end that is here/now.”

T. S. Eliot

Hugh Greene, who was director-general of the BBC from 1960-1969, placed more emphasis on imaginative creativity than commercial work, earning him the nickname "BBC's radical". In this way, the work of the BBC during his reign adapted to the social conditions and institutional changes of the 1960s. One of his most important acts is Sydney Newman's approval of the Doctor Who series (Briggs and Burke, 2011)[1]. Although it took time for the Doctor to transform from a children's show character to teach children history to a time-traveling action hero and sci-fi icon, it was Hugh Greene and his vision that liberated the BBC that started this whole narrative.

Historically, science-fiction books, movies, and TV series often tell about the adventures of characters from other realms and other. Badou said, "As a didactic literature that offers a generalization about the future based on the scientific and technical knowledge of a period and progresses depending on developments, although it left a group of works outside its borders, it fell into a narrow mold in a very short time." He argues that the essence of fiction is a fairy-tale imagination and a sense of wonder, which he calls “sense of wonder” (2003). Science fiction is a genre open to allegory. Cultural concerns and politics can often find a place for themselves in the narratives of this genre. However, no matter what period it takes place, science fiction is always about the present (Kolker, 2009)[2]. What made Doctor Who so popular was its ability to keep up with the times. It is observed that good science fiction works are produced during the rise of new classes aimed at improving society. In particular, films that include time travel aim to show the possibilities that can build the future by looking at people and their history from outside the perception of society and by making the past speak with a critical consciousness (Kaplan & Ünal, 2011)[3]. Doctor Who series combines real historical events with fantastic space adventures, presenting us with future depictions at the intersection of reality and fiction. These depictions of the future do not hesitate to refer to the past, present and future of Britain to which they belong, and it should be said that Doctor Who, whose primary goal is to transfer British cultural heritage to children, does not stray too far from this main mission. Setting out to teach history to new generations, the series now undertakes the task of preserving the unity of the nation and introducing the changing faces of multicultural Britain to the world.

Culture acts as a bridge between societies' futures and pasts. It therefore permeates political institutions, thoughts, and behavior. This effect is valid for both beliefs and ideologies and cultural wholes (Kışlalı, 2005)[4]. When culture is accepted as a unity of behavior, it should be noted that this unity is related to the present and past conditions that make a society different from other societies. In this sense, culture also has a national dimension. There is, however, an increasingly universal aspect of culture. Not detaching from the features that make that society unique while participating in universality is the action that all states try to do. Multiculturalism focuses on whether minority cultures are adequately represented in the cultural canon. Minority cultures face the fate of being excluded or ignored, and as a result, a distorted image of themselves is formed in excluded groups (Berger, 2012)[5]. This is also true for ethnic groups in England who did not encounter any representation of themselves in previous seasons of Doctor Who (especially between 1963-1989). However, Season 11, which started airing in 2018, opened new doors by featuring people from different ethnic identities as the main characters. Fascism, on the other hand, does not like this difference and aims to destroy it (Kolker, 2010)[6].

Doctor Who has been an integral part of popular culture since 1963. It has become a national icon, especially for Britain. While Raymond Williams defines popular culture as being created by the people, he defines mass culture as created for the people by a particular social group. Popular culture can appeal to all segments of society. Elements of both low culture and high culture can be incorporated into popular culture. According to those who do not support it, the most important features of popular culture are pseudo-individualism, standardization, and distraction (Akdağ, 2008)[7]. Of course, there are thinkers who disagree and argue that popular culture is a battleground. One of them is John Fiske, who claims that popular culture texts are an area of struggle for meaning, and another is Raymond Williams, who defends the power and function of popular culture (Stevenson, 2008)[8].

Scognamillo, on the other hand, expresses the following about the relationship between culture and cinema-television:

When we look at the cultural representative and carrier cinema and ideological cinema from the same angle, we come across interesting and explanatory points. When we look at the culture we call "general", there is no doubt that the political dimension and preference bring us dilemmas and information about the culture of that society in the social life of a particular society. If the national culture reflects the lifestyle, ideals and religious belief of a society arising from its traditions and customs, it also explains the political preference that is kneaded with that culture and the reasons for this preference. From this point of view, the change of political/ideological preferences from time to time is nothing but the indicator of a culture in motion. Among such changes, cinema – and later television – is the most appropriate and effective tool that brings, explains, advocates, and necessitates every form of change to the widest communities. The process and dynamics of a national culture reaching universality are generally similar (1997).

Indeed, the change in ideological preferences in the Doctor Who series is due to the fact that the culture is in motion. The values underlying the fact that a show in which Asians are not represented at all, includes Yaz, an Asian main character, are undoubtedly cultural and ideological. Williams explains the three basic uses of ideology as a system of beliefs specific to a certain group, a system of deceptive beliefs that may conflict with true knowledge, and the general process of producing meaning and ideas (Fiske, 2003)[9]. Cultural Studies highlights the relatively autonomous structure of culture and considers the field of mass communication as a space in which various classes struggle discursively for social domination (Özsoy, 2011)[10]. Tools such as television and cinema are important for the organization of consent. Gramsci claims that the dominant bloc, which is influential in all areas of society, developed popular knowledge and culture in a way that secures the participation of the masses (1986). Culture and ideology are indispensable concepts in culturalism. It seems meaningless to consider a series broadcast on the BBC, which has been the public service broadcaster of Britain for many years, independently of the culture and ideology duo. Fairclough explains the relationship between texts and ideology as follows:

While it is a fact that the ideologies embedded in the texts, the forms and content of the texts conform to the traces of ideological processes and structures, it is impossible to read the ideologies from the texts. This is because meanings are produced through the interpretation of texts and texts are open to different interpretations, and another reason is that ideological processes do not belong to texts produced, distributed and interpreted as moments of these events, but to discourses as holistic social events (2003).

Discourse is that which transmits and produces power. It both strengthens it and is the way to destroy it. While Fiske talks about television texts, he states that the studies that deal with them as readership have been unsuccessful, but the reception studies have gained importance in terms of seeing the potential of television texts (1992). Indeed, the real strength of popular culture narratives has emerged with audience studies. The BBC also attaches importance to such studies. It should be added that the last season of Doctor Who attracts a new audience, younger than the previous ones and predominantly female. People who see what they represent are drawn to that popular culture text. Even this reveals how important the problem of representation is.

Benedict Anderson says that communities called nations are built on the assumption that people who would probably never know each other act with similar ideas, except for rough lines such as language, religion and cultural partnership. Dreams lie at the heart of this community, and these dreams are nourished by the stories that the nation, believing that it comes from a common past, has endured various pains in history for the sake of common ideals. These narratives imagine the future of the nation through its common past (Pekerman, 2012)[11]. In Doctor Who, the Doctor acts in accordance with the common ideals of the nation, both in the past and in the future. According to Del Rio-Alvaro and Garcia-Mainar, “We evaluate the past and the future with today's cultural concerns and today's critical framework” and therefore the past and future are constantly changing in the present (Pekerman, 2012)[11]. Happy endings are important in the Doctor Who narrative because they point to a happy future. No matter what slice of time he goes, the Doctor and his companions bring the worries and mindset of the present to that time. They change their own present tense with what they learn there.

From the 1960s on, anthropology began to use the concept of ethnicity. This became a global situation in the '90s, as ethnicity studies became important after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. Pre-national and sub-ethnic identities were thought to be destroyed in the modern process, but this did not happen. It was said that the modern individual cultivates himself and builds his own identity. Modern imaginations that we can reinvent ourselves have not destroyed ethnic identities. The events that took place after the breakup of Yugoslavia reflect this beautifully. According to thinkers like Marx, ethnic identity provides a false sense of belonging, while thinkers like Smith attach importance to this belonging. Along with ethnicity, nationalism has also been on the rise in late nationalizing peoples. Communities such as the European Union prevent the emergence of ethnic identities. It is this situation that started processes such as Brexit and the rising nationalist waves in Europe. British people think that their national identity is suppressed by states like Germany and France which are more active within the European Union. While there are great concerns about what the post-Brexit Britain will look like, iconic TV series such as Doctor Who aim to slow the decline by bringing different facets of national identity to the screen.

The imagination of a rational, democratic and universal belonging has been crushed under national and ethnic pride (Bolaffi et al., 2013)[12]. What modernists fail to understand is how people can die for their nation or ethnicity. However, Anthony Smith, whose theory is used in this study, can understand this. Being one of the pioneers of the ethno-symbolic approach, Smith differs from both primordialists and modernists with his views. According to him, the nation was not created, but it is not as essentialist as primordialists. According to Smith, a nation identity was created by manipulating past myths and symbols. According to him, to understand nation building, we need to look at the origins. It accepts that the nation is the product of the modern age (Smith, 2017)[13]. Smith does not take kindly to global culture. He describes this culture as shallow and shapeless and argues that such a culture cannot be emotionally connected with meanings. For him, this global culture is historyless, constructed, timeless and memoryless. However, Smith acknowledges that national cultures are also constituted "imaginary communities." Nations are made up of invented traditions, such as the kilt and the English coronation. According to Smith, there are no "memories of the world", at least those that exist are not capable of creating a sense of global unity (cited in Tomlinson, 2017)[14]. In Doctor Who, the Doctor and his friends, who travel all over time and space, instill a sense of galactic unity in the audience. Smith, on the other hand, thinks that the existence of national cultures can hinder the emergence of a global culture. He claims that global identity cannot give the feeling of being chosen, unique histories and special destinies (as cited in Tomlinson, 2017)[14]. In Doctor Who, "being human" takes place as a national identity in a huge galaxy. There are also those who see humanity as a metaphor for "white" ethnicity in this series (Howard & Smith, 2013)[15]. Engin Sarı quotes Armstrong and Smith's views as follows:

Armstrong and Smith's ethno-symbolic approach focuses attention on survival, change, ethno-revival, and ethnic histories. Myths and symbols create a sense of unity among people, ensure coexistence and ensure the continuation of the community. For those who adopt the ethno-symbolic approach, ethnic existence is tied to collective difference and a sense of collective mission. Therefore, spiritual elements such as ethnic memory, symbols, traditions, myths and values should be considered (2010).

Smith places particular emphasis on ethnicity. According to him, the six main characteristics of an ethnic community are: “A collective proper name, a common ancestry myth, shared historical memories, one or more differentiating elements of a common culture, a bond with a special homeland, and a sense of solidarity among significant segments of the population.” (Smith, 2017)[13]. The fact that a time travel television program such as Doctor Who, which has a history of more than fifty years, frequently refers to the past, culture and homeland of the British Empire is related to the consolidation of this special national bond. In the past, while this was told through white men, it is now conveyed through the new ethnicities of the changing Britain. National symbols embody the basic concepts of nationalism and make them visible to all members of the community. Symbols and ceremonies have collective emotional qualities. Symbols of Britain have appeared in Doctor Who since 1963. From the London Bridge to the Thames, from royalty to Shakespeare, all the symbols of the nation come together to create a narrative through time.

The Doctor is a time lord from a planet called Gallifrey. Time lords are portrayed as a mighty race living in Gallifrey (Tulloch and Alvarado, 1983)[16]. This planet was sent to a pocket universe in the Last Great Time War, and Gallifrey and all its clone planets were destroyed in the War in Heaven. Detached from his planet, the Doctor is born with the TARDIS (Time and Relative Dimension in Space) and travels the entire universe and time with the companions he has acquired here. From this perspective, the Doctor is an immigrant, even an asylum seeker. Because the Dalek race, the eternal enemy of the time lords, is trying to find and destroy the last Doctor in all time and space. The Dalek race is compared to the Nazis in the series because of their obsession with "racial purity" (Larsen, 2013)[17].

The Doctor, an immigrant in the world, is found strange at first glance by people due to his interesting clothes and movements. He is another.

Why does the Other remain the Other? What is the reason for our hatred for him?... This is hatred for the pleasure the Other takes. This must be the most general formula of the modern racism we are witnessing today: the Other's own way of enjoying himself… essentially a hatred for the Other who steals my joy (Diken, 2016)[18].

The Doctor enjoys life and his adventures as an Other, but there are times when this is not welcome. The Daleks especially find it difficult to withstand the Doctor's glee. This stems from their hatred of the Other. Daleks also have color distinctions within their own race, and therefore they experience interethnic conflicts among themselves (Britton, 2013)[19].

The Doctor was portrayed by eight different white men between 1963 and 1989 (Fly, 2013)[20]. From 2005 to 2018, there are five different Doctors, all white, with only one female. This shows that until the last season, the BBC creates a common history with the Doctor Who series, but this history is the history of white men. However, as an immigrant, the Doctor belongs to a different alien race. His experiences with people in the world are no different from ethnic relations. Finds people interesting. But this interest can sometimes go so far as to underestimate them.

Richard Dyer says that whiteness is also an ethnicity, but it is tried to be shown as natural. The concept he calls racial image is important to the modern world:

The racial image has a central place in the organization of the modern world. Regions and countries export their products at what cost, whose voice is heard at international meetings, who bombs and is bombed, who gets what job, house, access to health and education, what cultural activities are sold, under what conditions they are approved, all of which are largely inseparable from the racial image. (Dyer, 1997)[21].

Racial imagery is often dominated by whites in TV shows like Doctor Who. There is also a hierarchy among other alien races in this series. The more docile alien races are being helped, while races like the Dalek are destroyed across all time and space. Throughout the series, the Doctor character is represented as a brave, fair and understanding character who stands by the oppressed and intervenes in their struggle at the expense of changing history. In the case of certain races, however, this changes and an enraged Doctor appears.

The Doctor has battled National Socialism many times over time on the occasion of the Daleks. In fact, the 11th Doctor fights the Daleks on the day London is bombed by Germany. The juxtaposition of the image of the Daleks and the Nazi seems obvious (Scully, 2013)[22]. On the day London was bombed, it aims to strengthen the bond of nation by reminding a national trauma.

In the 2011 episode of The Doctor's Wife (Richard Clark, 2011)[23], it is stated that the Doctor has the power to change gender. The Doctor, who has mixed relations with both his homeland and his adopted homeland, the World, does not feel fully belonging to either of them. Despite this, the Doctor is never exposed to racism during his journeys, on the contrary, he always has a privileged position (Hernandez, 2013)[24]. He travels as he pleases, corrects his mistakes, is superior to everyone in intelligence and morally superior to most. The differences of the Doctor, who is excluded among his own people, stem from his intellectual superiority. If the doctor is discriminated against, it is because of their own race, and the violence of discrimination is never as advanced as slavery or colonization. Its cultural conflict is that of an individual conflicting with the politics of his nation. It is not the conflict of an enslaved, racially discriminated Other. The Doctor, who has an identity crisis with the disappearance of all the other time lords, begins to have trouble adjusting. Perhaps for this reason, when it was announced that David Tennant would be leaving the role of Doctor at the end of 2009, the possibility of a woman or a black Doctor was emphasized. In fact, the name of the black actor Paterson Joseph was spoken. While a group of people were upset when the role went to white actor Matt Smith, a group of Britons sighed with relief. To these Britons, the Doctor and Bond should always be white. While a Black Doctor has yet to arrive, almost a decade after 2009 the winds of change came with a woman.

It is observed that different ethnicities were underrepresented in the Doctor Who series between 1963 and 1989. While the White Doctor and his white companions embark on incredible adventures in all corners of time and space, it is very rare to see any black, Asian or Middle Eastern person appear in the series (Guerdan, 2013)[25].

During the Russell T Davies term, which began in 2005, the Doctor had two black companions for the first time in his history. One of them is Mickey Smith and the other is Martha Jones. The Doctor, especially the first 12 Doctors, has a tendency to see his companions as people over whom he can teach them and gain power. With ethnic issues in the frame, the Doctor appears to be a white powerhouse barking orders at blacks. There were many moments when Martha was pushed out of the narrative because she was both black and a woman, and even her anger was tried to be wronged by the Doctor. The Shakespeare Code (Charlie Palmer, 2007)[26] in 2007 is one such episode (Yeager, 2013)[27]. Also, the Doctor never treats Martha as he always treats Rose, whom he has a crush on, and does not praise her abilities as much. Again, Mickey is often included in the series as a comedy element. The doctor takes away the woman he loves (Dodson, 2013)[28].

By the time of Steven Moffat, characters like Liz 10 and Mels are strong women of different ethnicities, but they have problematic qualities. While the character Liz hides behind a "white" mask, Meks is forgotten in the series, then she dies and is replaced by a white woman. The Moffat period seems to be more troubled than the Davies period.

Rose and Mickey were the first interracial couple to be introduced on the show from 2005. Several other interracial relationships were shown on the show while Davies ran the show. Although Rose broke up with Mickey and reunited with the Doctor's clone, Mickey also found love with Martha Jones (Asher-Perrin, 2013). The Doctor's ever-lasting optimism is revealed in the series named after him, embodied in his dream of a happier and more peaceful society for all. Davies, a gay, white man, tried to include characters and actors from different ethnicities and sexual orientations in the series.

Davies, who stated in his memoirs that he did not want to be embarrassed by going to the houses of his friends from different ethnicities and watching Doctor Who with them, brought many new characters to the series for this cause (Davies and Cook, 2008)[29]. It would be disrespectful to his legacy to deny the gains made by him.

Moffat, on the other hand, has a much more troubled perspective in terms of ethnicity representations in both Sherlock and Doctor Who. His Doctor is a white man and his companions are white people. His representations of blacks in his era were almost always upper-class and were the characters who took the side of the oppressors in oppressive regimes (Welch, 2013)[30].

Cultural identity determines what happens to us over time (Sarı, 2010)[31]. Stuart Hall speaks of cultural identity as follows:

Identity belongs to the future as well as to the past. Cultural identity does not have a quality that transcends time, place, history and culture. Cultural identities come from somewhere, they have histories. But like everything historical, it is in constant transformation. It is far from having a fixed quality in an 'abstract' past. Cultural identities are subject to the interaction between history, culture and power. Far beyond being grounded in a past that is waiting to be discovered and that will secure our sense of who we are when discovered, identity is the name we give to the ways we position ourselves against or within narratives about the past (Hall, 1990. Cited in Sarı, 2010)[32].

The moments in which the Doctor reveals who they are thanks to the discovery of the cultural identities of his companions are frequently on the agenda in the series. At this point, a name that should be mentioned in the Moffat era is the character of Bill Potts. Bill, a black lesbian, impresses the Doctor with her wit and travels with him, learning more about herself during these journeys and narratives. So far everything is good. However, he is later held captive by cybermen for years, eventually transformed into a non-human by Heather, with whom he is romantically involved, and they journey into space with him. Having to suffer for years for a black woman, then being transformed into an emotionless being is—no doubt—problematic.

Ethnicity representations in Doctor Who's narratives of the past appear to be better between 2005 and 2018 than between 1968 and 1989. Here, after the 1970s, it can be said that the representations in Doctor Who improved with the influence of civil movements, and even imperialism was criticized in four episodes (Vohlidka, 2013)[33].

It is emphasized that the Doctor was clearly British between 1963 and 1989. The program itself is filled with being British between these years. Almost most of the episodes are shot in London (Harmes, 2013)[34]. However, Scottish actor Peter Capaldi, who played the 12th Doctor, appeared in the series with his usual accent. This proves that the Doctor's British roots have evolved over time into British roots.

The expected change in 2009 comes with the announcement of British actress Jodie Whittaker as the Doctor in 2018. Known for their devotion to the Doctor, as well as their devotion to Bond, some of the British public were unfriendly to the idea of ​​a female Doctor. In fact, the worst imdb ratings in the history of the series (including the episodes that could be described as racist in previous seasons) belong to this season. This is more like a group of cyber attacks than people's actual opinions. This season of the series is the season that has been exposed to the most racist attacks in forums and one-on-one views. Some people criticize Season 11 for "publicity", "like a history lesson", and "too much agitation". On the other hand, this season of the series is one of the most popular seasons. The new season, which has caught a new audience, especially women and young people, is the season in which the series has achieved the most successful cinematographic works. Doctor Who, which is a guest on the screens with plans and visual effects that do not look like big-budget Hollywood sci-fi, has been going places since the fall of 2018, under the leadership of the new director of the program, Chris Chibnall.

Chibnall's most important work was to boldly choose a female Doctor. This change, talked about over the years but never realized, helped the show find the new blood it needed. Along with her companions Ryan, Yaz and Graham, the Female Doctor travels across all time and space, this time not as a master but as a teammate. Ryan is a smart and brave black young man. Yaz is a young Pakistani-British female police officer. Graham, on the other hand, is a friendly middle-aged white man who embraces differences and mourns the death of his black wife, Grace. Instead of issuing orders to his companions as in previous seasons, the Doctor, who really gets used to them, allows them to live their own narratives. This is the first season to focus on his companions rather than the Doctor.

The series has been criticized in previous seasons for not addressing the post-colonial era by the oppressed. In her article, Vanessa De Kauwe states that post-colonial representation in Doctor Who is not told through the eyes of the oppressed and those who experience the pain (2013). Whereas, the episode of Demons of the Punjab (Jamie Childs, 2018)[35] in season 11 was written by Indian-born Vinay Patel and is told entirely through the eyes of Yaz and her grandmother. The heroes of that episode are these two brave women. This chapter, which describes the religious conflict in India in 1947, focuses on the love between a Hindu man and a Muslim woman (McNeill, 2006)[36]. This woman is Yaz's grandmother. Patel, who centers Yaz instead of the Doctor (a white woman) in this narrative, looks at ethnic conflicts through the eyes of a woman. It would be correct to say that women do not find much place in nation narratives. As biological producers of ethnic communities, determinants of the boundaries of ethnic and national groups, carriers of community values, determinants of ethnic and national differences, and active participants in national conflicts, women somehow disappear into national narratives (Yuval-Davis, 1998). Doctor Who put women at the center of the national narrative in the 11th season with the active participation of women.

Another important episode in the 11th Season of Doctor Who is the 3rd episode called Rosa (Mark Tonderai, 2018)[37]. The script of this episode belongs to Malorie Blackman, a black woman, and Chris Chibnall, the current season's director of the series. The episode takes place in 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama. What makes the episode really important is that Rosa Parks tells the story of the uprising. Rosa, an African-American woman, refuses to get up from her seat on the bus for whites in a time of apartheid, so she is arrested and triggers the start of the black civil rights movement in America. The scenario, produced by a black woman, deals with the struggle for social rights of women and different ethnicities. Pakistani Yaz is exposed to racist words as “Mexican” and black Ryan the n word. This episode specifically focuses on the exclusion and struggle of the two of them and Rosa in this society. Meanwhile, the racist time-terrorist Krasko tries to prevent Rosa Parks' objection that day by making small interventions. A white man tries to change a black woman's narrative and is blocked by another black man. Trying to offend Ryan by saying, "Your kind won't do things bigger than your size," Krasko is sent "to the past, where his ideas belong," as a result of Ryan's modification of his time instrument. Krasko is always framed by making it small with an upper angle throughout the section. Whereas, Ryan, Yaz and Rosa are shot with a low angle glorified by the camera. Rosa Parks' saying "When today is not going well, all you have left is tomorrow" is actually important in terms of seeing how narratives of the past shape the future and the present. Because the people who made Rosa fulfill her destiny are the time travelers from tomorrow. In the episode, it is observed that Yaz character spends a lot of time with Rosa, and Yaz tells Rosa that she is a cop, but actually wants to have authority (“I want to be in charge”). There is no doubt that this smart and brave woman will one day achieve this. Towards the end of the episode, with the support of the whole team, Rosa does not give up her seat and is arrested. At the end of the episode, while the Doctor and his companions are in the TARDIS, they talk about the end of the seat separation in 1956, and Rosa Parks receiving the Medal of Freedom from the President in 1999. The Doctor points to the Rosaparks asteroid, stating that Rosa has changed the universe, not the world.

This season of the show has been criticized for "sending out too many social messages". It is observed that especially white cis-gendered men do not like this season. Why is history's first female Doctor and her three companions representing Britain's changing face pushing white sensibilities so much? While episodes focusing on the suffering of white men such as Vincent and the Doctor (Jonny Campbell, 2010)[38] are the most beloved episodes of the series, why is the pain of a black woman a problem? This is an issue that needs to be handled and discussed closely. However, the subject of this study is representation analysis, not audience research.

In this study, national identity theories are mentioned, general information about Doctor Who is given, and ethnic representations that have changed from past to present are discussed. The under-representation between 1963 and 1989 is mentioned, the Moffat and Davies periods are summarized, and the Chibnall period is given a longer attention, especially the 3rd and 6th Episodes of the 11th Season. As a result, it has been observed that the ethnic representations have changed for the better with the female Doctor and her colleagues of different ethnicities. Although there is still a long way to go, it has been observed that the white male narrative, which has been criticized for years, has left its place to women and different ethnic groups. And the next Doctor is to be Ncuti Gatwa, a queer black man of Rwandan-Scottish descent. This shows that things have changed after the female Doctor.

As a result, the 11th season of Doctor Who, one of the symbols of being British, is an effort to alleviate, perhaps prevent, the cultural disintegration that awaits Britain after Brexit. Collingwood, who says, "The past that the historian works on is not a dead past, but a past that is still alive today in a certain sense", emphasizes the idea that history is the history of ideas (Carr, 2013)[39]. It can be said that the Doctor and his companions did not deal with a dead past in 11 episodes of witch trials, internal conflicts based on religion and racism narratives, but fought with bloody and lively ideas that still exist today. But who better to lead this war than the women who have been trying to be erased from national narratives and history for centuries?