http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1246406...

Another solid enough Tenth Doctor novel from Rayner (I haven't checked, but she must by now be one of the most prolific of Who writers, combining books and audio). In a slightly confusing stylistic quirk, about half of the book is told by Martha Jones in the first person, while most of the rest is also from her point of view but in the third person in varying degrees of tightness. This does give us odd moments of nice characterisation like this:

‘Doctor!’ Vanni said (people do that, you know. It’s always ‘Doctor!’ Never ‘Martha!’ Same with villains. ‘Get the Doctor and the girl!’ Oh well, maybe one day it’ll be ‘Get Martha and the man!’ and he’ll know what it feels like to be the anonymous spare part. Not that I actually want to be captured by villains or anything, I should point out).

Which is more of a meditation on the companion's lot than we are used to. As usual (as I'm beginning to realise) a slightly out-of-nowhere ending, but basically a decent addition to the shelves. ( )

A nice wee run a round story. Has a bit to say on the morality of zoos. And does a nice line in Doctor and Martha characterisation.
A bit Deus Ex Machina at the end perhaps though. ( )

I really like that this book is angry (well, mildly annoyed) at the real life issues of conservation and extinction, even if some of thosee points are directly lifted from Ghost Light. It's refreshing for one of the NSAs to have something to say without being too didactic rather than just being an escapist runaround. Although yes, it's still an entertaining enough escapist runaround too. There's some nice subtle references to the old series for the long term fans and the Doctor going up against sabre toothed tigers, dinosaurs and bomb planting dodo clones is exactly the sort of thing these books should be giving us since they're beyond the scope of the telly. Loved the last chapter too, answered a question that was nagging at the back of my mind from the start.

But...

I'm not sure what the point of the first person Martha narration was - there didn't seem to be any particularly good reason for switching to first person and seemed just there to liven up what might otherwise have been a slightly dull first half although, on the plus side, Rayner nails the Doctor's character to the point her own characters are sketches in comparison. Oh, and the I Spyder and animal description just looked like pure padding to an otherwise skimpy narrative to me, yes they're largely educational but don't serve the story at all and seem a bit clunky. And I'm not sure the premise holds together if you look too closely. Not bad but not great - I still think Jac comes up with some great ideas but doesn't exploit them in the way other Who writers (such as Steve Lyons) do. ( )

I really want to like Jacqueline Rayner's work. Not simply because she is one of the few women writing Dr Who novels but because she has a distinctive voice and a bittersweet lightness of touch that should make a refreshing change from the more serious-minded and action-oriented output that typifies the range. But somehow her work never really gells for me and I'm left feeling that the comedic aspects have misfired letting down the whole. In the case of the Last Dodo the parts that really grated were those written in the first person from Martha's point of view in a kind of gushing I'm-talking-to-an-eight-year-old fashion. Not only did I simply not find these particular amusing and a little patronising there didn't seem to be any reason why half the story should be told in this fashion and half in the third person, sometimes switching between the two mid-scene. I mean why? why not write it all in the first person from Martha's point of view, or at least write every scene she was in from Martha's point-of-view, or if you must switch then at least provide the framing device of a diary, or writing a letter to a young cousin, or something.

The rest of the book was OK, the characters were pretty one-dimensional (even when they weren't supposed to be), the plot was a fairly straightforward sequence of run-arounds but it was all competent. I can see that its brief descriptions of extinct and endangered species would appeal to much of the target audience. I like the fact that Rayner experiments with story-telling styles, in this case switching points of view. I like the fact she writes about topics she is passionate about. I like the fact that she appreciates that Who story-telling can be both light-hearted and serious at one and the same time. But in the end, as with so many of her books, the parts just never fell together into a satsifying whole for me and I finished with feelings largely of disinterest in the plot and characters and vague irritation at the execution. ( )