THE UNMUTUAL PRISONER ARTICLE ARCHIVE

THE PROJECTION ROOM (The Prisoner Compared...)

"CHILDREN OF THE STONES"

A TALE OF TWO VILLAGES:
THE PRISONER AND CHILDREN OF THE STONES
by Dr. Andrew K. Shenton

Areas of similarity between The Prisoner, the surreal, ITC/Everyman prime-time 1960s programme, and Children of the Stones, a seven-part HTV production made for youngsters some ten years later, are not easy to detect immediately. The shows were made at different times, for different audiences and by different television companies and production teams. Indeed, only Peter Graham Scott, who produced and directed Children of the Stones, and who also directed The Prisoner story, The General, appears to have worked in a significant capacity on both programmes. Nevertheless, actors-turned-writers were heavily involved in the development of the two works. Jeremy Burnham, co-creator and co-writer of Children of the Stones, had been a noted film and television actor in the 1950s and 1960s and, by the mid-1970s, he had made his mark in writing too, having contributed to such series as The Avengers and Paul Temple. Co-author Trevor Ray had also initially come to prominence through acting and, although his experience of writing for television was less than that of Burnham, he had worked in a script editing capacity on Doctor Who and Paul Temple. Like Ray, Patrick McGoohan, the man who had the greatest creative input into The Prisoner, was hitherto best known for his acting – most specifically his portrayal of John Drake in Danger Man. Even as recently as the late 1990s, in fact, Gregory (1) suggested that McGoohan’s “reputation as an ‘author’ rests with The Prisoner alone” (p. 197).

McGoohan and Burnham/Ray appear to have been able to exercise a considerable degree of control over the production of their respective programmes. As executive producer, star of the show and writer of three instalments and director of five, McGoohan’s substantial role in the making of The Prisoner is well documented. Similarly, Gareth Thomas (2), co-star of Children of the Stones, has recalled how Burnham and Ray were heavily involved in the production of the HTV programme. In particular, Thomas has reported their frequent presence during the recording of the episodes and has recollected that very few changes were made to their scripts as they were being filmed.

With regard to structure and plot, there are more similarities between Children of the Stones and The Prisoner than might be expected. On a fundamental level, both may be considered serials, yet they are of different kinds. Tulloch and Alvarado (3) believe The Prisoner to be an episodic serial. Here, they explain, the viewer “has to see all the episodes encompassed within... to understand fully the narrative structure and closure” (p. ix.). The same description may be applied to Children of the Stones. However, in the 1960s serial, most of the seventeen episodes can be enjoyed as fairly self-contained stories, especially since a résumé of the overall premise is provided as part of the title sequence of the instalments. The order in which the episodes should be seen has been the subject of great speculation over the years by several writers (4) and the fact that there is no universally agreed running order suggests that episodes two to fifteen may be watched virtually interchangeably. Such an argument has been cogently expressed by Gregory (5). In contrast, the later instalments of Children of the Stones are not easily understood without seeing the previous parts.

The essentials of the plots of The Prisoner and Children of the Stones are remarkably similar. In each case, the serial begins with the hero(es) arriving in a village that seems a world in itself, each with its own rites and customs. During the course of the episodes, the main characters learn more about the village and its people. The inhabitants can be categorised into two groups – those who have become blissfully happy in the village and live in a trance-like state, and others who are much less at ease. In each village, leadership is provided by a dominating figure who is served by a shadowy butler and lives in some isolation within a building much more splendid than the houses of the other villagers. The leader uses advanced scientific equipment in order to suppress the village inhabitants and it soon becomes apparent to the heroes that they are not expected to leave. Nevertheless, rebelling against the artificial happiness imposed on the rest of the village, they resist efforts to “treat” them. After initial, ineffective escape attempts, in the final episode they are successful in leaving their respective villages by road and appear to liberate the other inhabitants.

In The Prisoner and Children of the Stones, the villages are superficially idyllic, with the weather fine and warm seemingly day after day. Yet sinister plots are hatched by authority figures, and the inhabitants are reduced to a state of mindless conformity. They are rendered passive and unable to respond for themselves. In Children of the Stones, this “world empty of feeling”, as it is described in the penultimate episode by one of the heroes, has been the result of a systematic process by the maverick astronomer, Raphael Hendrick, to subjugate all inhabitants of Milbury to his will, a scheme that appears akin to the “instant social conversion” method employed by the authorities in the A Change of Mind story of The Prisoner. Indeed, Hendrick’s plan “to extract... man’s ability to think for himself, the quality that makes him human” as one of his antagonists describes it, closely matches the objectives of the Village authorities in The Prisoner. In a similar vein, the way in which children in Milbury are fast-tracked to working with advanced mathematical concepts in Children of the Stones is somewhat reminiscent of the “Speedlearn” programme introduced in The Prisoner story, The General. Moreover, in each series, the fact that the villagers acknowledge each other in highly idiosyncratic fashion (with “Be seeing you!” in The Prisoner and “Happy day!” in Children of the Stones) is testimony not only to the unique nature of each village but also to the lack of individual expression among the inhabitants. The former is further emphasised by the unusual customs followed in the two places. In particular, strange variations are introduced to existing pastimes. In The Prisoner, a human game of chess is played on the village lawn (in Checkmate), whilst a modified morris dance is used in Milbury to welcome newly-treated villagers to the brethren. Even some of the dialogue spoken within one of the serials would appear equally appropriate in the other. For example, in the penultimate instalment, in response to the imposed happiness brought about by Hendrick, the hero of Children of the Stones retorts with the Prisoneresque soundbite, “There can be no happiness without free will”.

Nevertheless, key differences emerge in the plots of the two programmes. Although each concentrates primarily on events involving a newcomer or pair of newcomers, the circumstances leading to their arrival in the respective villages are very different. In Children of the Stones, astro-physicist Adam Brake and his son, Matthew, come to Milbury voluntarily, in order to undertake research work for Adam’s university, whilst, in The Prisoner, the hero is kidnapped from his home so that the authorities may learn the reason for his resignation from an important secret service post. Subsequently, whilst Adam and Matthew become fairly integrated into the life of the village, with the boy attending the local school and Adam forming close relationships with other inhabitants, especially the museum curator, Margaret, in The Prisoner the new arrival never settles and trusts few fellow residents. Even though an atmosphere of menace is apparent in both villages from the outset, in Children of the Stones it is only gradually that the true extent of the villagers’ slavery to Hendrick emerges, whereas, in The Prisoner, a mood of violence and conformity is evident from the first episode. Furthermore, whilst escape is a key theme within The Prisoner, especially in the first half of the saga, in Children of the Stones it is not until the penultimate instalment that Adam and Matthew try to leave Milbury.
The leadership provided by Hendrick is quite different from that of Number Two in The Prisoner. The latter is himself merely following the orders of a superior, the largely unseen Number One, whereas Hendrick appears accountable to nobody. His scheme for control of Milbury is clearly his own and he has gained his power by harnessing the cosmic forces he has discovered. Moreover, unlike Number Two, he is not intent on extracting secrets from others. Apparently viewing himself as a kind of quasi-religious figure, he seems to occupy no official position of outright leadership in Milbury, other than being Lord of the Manor and a local Justice of the Peace. He is aided only by his butler, Link. Number Two, in contrast, has the might of the authorities behind The Village available to him. He has at his disposal a team of underlings and a wealth of surveillance and security equipment that enables him to maintain order. Both Hendrick and Number Two, however, exploit computer-based technology in order to execute their schemes. White and Ali (6) note how the size of this hardware dates The Prisoner episode, The General, quite badly and a similar criticism may be made of Hendrick’s computer in Children of the Stones.

The conclusions of The Prisoner and Children of the Stones are highly enigmatic and leave the viewer with a sense of some unease. The ominous closing scene in each production leads to the suspicion that the events that have been witnessed may occur again. In the former, it would appear that the prisoner has not truly escaped from The Village, and, in the HTV serial, whilst the viewer may be confident that Adam and his son are finally free, it seems that the Hendrick character, now in the guise of Sir Joshua Litton, a newcomer to Milbury, may make another attempt to take control of the village. The impression of recursion is reinforced by the title of the final episode, Full Circle. Several commentators (7) have speculated that the events depicted in The Prisoner may be understood to be simply a “bad dream” and a similar suggestion may be offered to explain the happenings in Children of the Stones, especially since, in the climax of the final episode, Matthew asks his father, “Did it happen, or didn’t it?”, a question that draws a non-committal answer from Adam.

The Prisoner and Children of the Stones are both often regarded as works of Science Fiction. Indeed, there are entries for each in Roger Fulton’s The Encyclopedia of TV Science Fiction (8). Certainly, scientific ideas and Science Fiction themes, especially ESP, are prevalent in both but, in truth, each appears to be “borderline” Science Fiction and transcends genre. In the case of The Prisoner, such an argument is supported by the fact that in the episode, Living in Harmony, the basic scenario is reworked into a Western format. The Prisoner has been variously understood to be Fantasy, a work of political and social allegory and a comment on the nature of mankind, whilst Children of the Stones, which has no such lofty pretensions, can be viewed as essentially dealing in adventure, mystery, folklore, the supernatural and mysticism. Gareth Thomas (9) has highlighted how the mood of relaxation among the treated villagers is also reminiscent of 1960s “hippy culture”.

Relationships emerge as a major theme in each serial. In The Prisoner, that between Number Six and The Village is at the heart of the whole series, as it is designed to mirror the wider relationship between man and society with which the programme is especially concerned, but relationships in Children of the Stones are rather more personal. Most notably, they are those that involve Adam and his son, and Adam and the museum curator, Margaret. Nevertheless, the heroes of both serials steadfastly avoid any romantic entanglements. Gareth Thomas (10) has attributed Adam’s attitude towards Margaret to the fact that the children’s or, in his words, “kidult” nature of the programme prevented his character from developing a sexual relationship with her, and similar concern for his audience at least partly determined Patrick McGoohan’s principles governing Number Six’s sexual conduct. McGoohan (11) has justified the character’s behaviour on the grounds that he was aiming to produce a show suitable for family viewing. In each serial, there are clear opportunities for viewer identification. For years, fans of The Prisoner have empathised with McGoohan’s incarcerated character, and, in Children of the Stones, the young viewer is obviously intended to relate to the boy, Matthew, who draws his father into the story. The teamwork between them is a key element within the plot. In fact, The Rough Guide to Cult TV (12) goes so far as to suggest that the seriousness with which Adam responds to his son’s ideas, some of which appear quite fanciful to the rational academic, may have been a vital part of the programme’s popular appeal to youngsters.

Despite the importance of interpersonal relationships in The Prisoner and Children of the Stones, traditionally family structures are entirely absent in both communities. This is perhaps not surprising in The Prisoner, given that all The Village’s inhabitants are either “warders”, who are responsible for maintaining order in the community, or inmates, who have been kidnapped and forced to make new lives in The Village. The situation in Milbury is rather more puzzling, however. Typically, all the families in evidence are of the single parent, same sex variety. Although odd in itself, this situation is especially unusual in view of the fact that the programme was made as far back as 1976 when one parent families were far less common than today. The only family groups that feature in the story at all are Adam and his son, Matthew, Margaret and her daughter, Sandra, the village doctor, Lyle, and his boy, Kevin, and Browning, a farmer, and his son, Jimmo. The dialogue makes clear that Adam and Margaret have been widowed, but the fates of the wives of Lyle and Browning are never established. Curiously, no partners of any other characters in the story are seen at any point. The significance of this pattern is not explained, yet it could be that Hendrick allows no Milbury resident to have any companion other than those in his wider brethren.

Much of the action in both serials occurs in a small number of stock locations within the fictitious village. In The Prisoner, these include The Green Dome, home to Number Two, Number Six’s house and the Stone Boat and its environs, whilst, in Children of the Stones, the village museum, the cottage in which Adam and Matthew are staying and Hendrick’s residence, the stately Highfield House, are similarly important. Despite their “fantastic” feel, The Prisoner and Children of the Stones were both at least partly filmed in real life settings, with villages in Britain effectively doubling for fictitious places. In the former, the North Wales holiday resort of Portmeirion was used as The Village, whilst, for the latter, Avebury, in Wiltshire, was transformed into Milbury. Both locations were responsible for much of the atmosphere and with it the effectiveness of the productions.

Over forty years after the making of The Prisoner and more than thirty after that of Children of the Stones, each may be considered a “cult” programme, although the cult surrounding The Prisoner is much larger and more extensive. Both serials have been released on video cassette more than once and are now available on DVD. Unlike The Prisoner, however, Children of the Stones has never been repeated on terrestrial television after its initial transmission in January and February 1977. Nevertheless, both have been subjected to further work and updating many years after the making of the original serial. A new version of The Prisoner is currently being prepared, and a production overview accompanying the DVD release (13) suggested that, in 2000, Burnham and Ray had apparently only recently completed work on a Children of the Stones sequel.

References
(1) Gregory, C. Be seeing you... decoding The Prisoner. University of Luton Press, 1997.
(2) Interview with Gareth Thomas. Children of the Stones. Second Sight, 2002. DVD.
(3) Tulloch, J. and Alvarado, M. Doctor Who: the unfolding text. Macmillan, 1983.
(4) Including: White, M. and Ali, J. The official Prisoner companion. Sidgwick and Jackson, 1988; Hora, M. The Prisoner of Portmeirion. 2nd ed. Number Six Publications, 1989; Gregory, C. op. cit.
(5) Gregory, C. op. cit.
(6) White, M. and Ali, J. op. cit.
(7) Including: Hora, M. op. cit.; Gregory, C. op. cit.; O’Brien, D. SF: UK - How British Science Fiction changed the world. Reynolds and Hearn, 2000.
(8) Fulton, R. The encyclopedia of TV Science Fiction. TV Times/Boxtree, 1990.
(9) Interview with Gareth Thomas. op. cit.
(10) Ibid.
(11) Interview with Patrick McGoohan. In: White, M. and Ali, J. op. cit.
(12) The rough guide to cult TV. Penguin, 2002.
(13) Production overview. Children of the Stones. Second Sight, 2002. DVD.

 

Click here to return to The Projection Room

Click here to return to the Unmutual Article Archive

Click here to return to the Unmutual Home Page