Deep Breath

[Anonymous @]

SuzanneMS @bluesqueakpip

Identity Politics often leads to the use of certain statements which act as ‘argument’ or ‘debate.’ And they don’t always work that well. It could be that an agenda, besotted with debates around bi-sexuality, could lead to deeper, darker, water.

To state:

“Again, how is this different from most people? And not only is this not unique to the Doctor, I can’t recall anytime that it was even characteristic of the Doctor”

suggests a type of story patterning that goes hand in hand with identity consciousness -which is overcooked.  Also, I’d be concerned if “most people” would willingly kill themselves in response to grief. Whilst it happens, it doesn’t happen to most people. But Clara? After her own experiences? Yes, she could have, easily -as was evidenced on screen.

I think the on screen issue is important. If you refer to one thing on screen and infer that therefore another event must occur subsequent to this, then there’s inherent difficulty. If it’s motivated (placed on screen: such as the gravestone) then we can infer, correctly, what has actually happened.

With the Doctor, there’s a tendency to assume he really is a dismissive old man. Crotchety and difficult. As you write:

“dismissive of humans as merely intelligent apes”

I believe it’s more complicated. In Flatline, the Doctor was incredibly appreciative of the young artist and said “you’ll go far.” Into the Dalek, he had a job to do -but he wasn’t outright mean and dismissive. A difficult situation inferred a tough approach which both Smith and Tennant also incorporated into their actions.  This Doctor was at war inside a Dalek with soldiers, and instead of encouraging a wild panic, he lied, so the soldier wouldn’t experience that awful feeling: “I’m gonna die. Right now. As it turned out, they were whisked to Missy’s hideaway -and died later.

Nonetheless, it upset Clara dreadfully, and the others. To Clara, this was definitely a very new and quite scary individual.

In Robots of Sherwood, the Doctor seems to make (almost) lasting friendships with the men and boys of Sherwood after dismissing their banter: and even there, he vaguely acknowledges Clara’s correct. He mellows.

But you’re right about the Doctor being dismissive at this stage, because certainly, in Deep Breath, that’s all we have.

@ichabod

I know what you mean!

“Omnisexual” or “pan-sexual” might work (or not; see recent weird news story about a guy in Florida arrested for “capturing” an alligator and, yes, um . . . ).  I don’t think these words actually fit a person who is attracted to the whole LGBTC (?) spectrum as we know it, but not to, say, large, sentient pumpkins (or large non-sentient pumpkins, for that matter, which would be included in the “pan” or “omni” part along with aliens as well as alligators in the DW universe).  The Doctor himself felt he had to draw the line with that dinosaur lest she get the wrong idea, but of course he wasn’t in his right mind at the time . . .”

I heard about the alligator: here, in Oz! Grief! But yes, I was explaining that I liked the idea of Omni sexuality -as an idea. I suppose, moving further on with the thought, well, no, just no!    🙂  Even I have to stop somewhere with the inevitable conclusion. It’s interesting that the Story Telling of Identity Politics has moved on to include Omnireligious, as well;  purely based on the testimonials of others. Rather funny to read: it’s not about certain Indigenous cultures respecting particular icons such as our Indigenous population respects Uluru (once Ayres Rock) but rather other, erm, particularly unpleasant physical actions which is in no way relevant to this topic  -clocks myself on head! Phew <<*\*>>

 

 

[ichabod @ichabod]

@purofilion   Wait, “Omnireligious”?  I haven’t come across that before.  Sounds a bit like the Roman Empire, in which you could worship whatever the hell you wished to in any way you liked, so long as you paid your taxes and included the Emperor in your worship, once the emperors began claiming to be gods (late Empire, as I recall).

So, in these times of ours, does Omnireligous mean that you claim to practice any and all religions as the whim takes you, or as a rule (Monday, Thor; Tuesday, Kali; Wednesday is Ogun’s turn, etc.)?  Or just that you claim to accept all religions as equally valid?  Isn’t that sort of Universalist Unitarianism?

[Anonymous @]

@suzannems  @phaseshift

Indeed!

1.     “He also had Pagen equivalents of the King and Queen of the Trees declare that women are strong and men are weak, which as far of longevity\survival of DNA (Mitochondrial) is certainly true. Nature is no respector of equal opportunities.

2.    Just on Missy\Master, I think the line “well I could hardly keep calling myself the Master, could I?” …”

On the first, my brother, a geologist, has been explaining this point to me fairly recently (I had to be reminded of high school and university biology -I didn’t do too well so, as these things go, I tried to forget!)

Yes, I have a habit of making unnecessary things complicated. Or things unnecessarily complicated -when it comes to ‘2’.

@bluesqueakpip

“And quite a few people didn’t like it; I’m not sure how consciously people realised that Moffat had switched gender roles (right down to it being Amy who tries to celebrate the night before her wedding by sleeping with someone else) but the complaints did often centre about Rory being a ‘wimp’ and Amy ‘too assertive’.”

I totally agree with these people, Pip. I mean, come on, Rory, trying to look cool wearing a Roman’s outfit? With his skinny, white legs? And being the stay-at-home-Dad with a pony tail. Gorf, of course he was a wimp. And…Moffat’s a Communist. Also, he’s recently converted to Islam. I mean, The God Complex, right?

Obviously, I kid. But talk-back radio in Oz. The very definition of frellish hell.

@lisa apologies: I didn’t tag you and I meant to. I have to admit I haven’t read Hogfather.

I know!  And this a Dr Who Forum!  I shall be roundly verballed! Some while ago I was given a list of sci-fi/fantasy novels (thank you @pedant and others) and I’ve begun in earnest (it’s a jolly big list).

So the idea of Missy as governess was a deliberate choice? Insofar as she’s attempting to present a figure of independence in an era where governesses were strictly servants, ie, they ate with the housekeeper or in the ‘nursery’ with their charges and certainly didn’t take ‘tea’ with their employers during the afternoon.

Of course, my favourite governess has to be Jane Eyre -but she was no-body’s mistress. No, siree.

Oh and @arbutus on the other thread, the overlaps and influences from Farscape in Who. A whole thesis paper right there! Must head over…..

Kindest, puro

[lisa @lisa]

@Purofilion Jane Eyre isn’t the governess type I was thinking of.
Actually more like an aggressive disciplinary type with serious issues
because in real life the governess didn’t marry the Mr. Rochester’s.
It was not like that or like Mary Poppins. It came with a lot of
hardship. However I think there is something to the idea of straddling
across having some independence and being subject to your superiors as
governesses were always forced to do.
So then which superiors is Missy subject to and who is pulling her strings?

[Arbutus @arbutus]

I am losing the ability to keep track of this discussion, there are so many different threads in it! I am almost certainly not tagging everyone I ought to, so apologies in advance.

@proxy said: Even without a gender-swap regeneration, we’ve seen fairly severe personality changes. I much prefer Jenny’s attitude. When Clara asked her what if the person you liked changed, her response was, “I don’t like her, ma’am. I love her.” No asterisk. Granted Jenny wasn’t talking about a Time Lord, but still valid. Then again, the Doctor was afraid Clara might not like him anymore after regenerating.

That’s the thing, isn’t it? We mate for life (in theory, anyway), and we do change. My husband and I married as young(ish) people, and are now middle aged, with all the changes in appearance and attitudes that go with that. Eventually we will be elderly, and even more changed. But we still love each other, as Jenny says.

But what happens with regeneration seems to me altogether different. If my husband suddenly came back to me shorter, dark eyed, disliking baroque music and Italian food, and suddenly feeling an overwhelming need for an impeccably tidy house, that would present challenges. But possibly Time Lord lifestyles are less domestic? Maybe Time Lord marriages are more along the line of the dynastic unions of the old aristocracy, where husband and wife often led relatively independent lives? Or, as I have always thought, they just weren’t assumed to be life-long. Time and regeneration make fools of us all (or something like that.

As to Time Lord gender and sexuality, well, no reason to assume that they have any fewer parking spots along the spectrum than human society, and we have lots. But presumably, male plus female are still required for reproductive purposes. I am assuming that since I don’t think we have been shown any place where that is not the case. But as to raising the children, that is something else. I took away a bit of an impression from Listen that the Doctor spent some at least of his youth in some kind of group home. I was reminded a bit of LeGuin’s anarchist society in The Dispossessed, where at a certain age, the children went off to be raised by the collective, as parental attitudes were deemed selfishly antisocial.

@lisa @purofilion   Neat ideas about governesses, mistresses, and Missy. Not sure what it really means but I like the connections!

[Anonymous @]

@arbutus

yes! I read The Dispossessed and you’re quite right about the comparison: “selfishly antisocial”

@lisa I was kinda jokin’ about Jane Eyre: I loved her as a person but as she’s my favourite governess and one I admire, I just have to bring her up all the time! And no, they certainly didn’t marry their bosses -tongues would wag – and no doubt did, even after Rochester’s tragic accident, whole classes would split and fall into the Thames and kids would be stupider!

There were a number of Czech short stories I read as a child which focussed on the genteel-looking governess who wielded her cane and hid the children’s dinners -purely because she hated children. Not exactly appropriate bed-time reading and possibly designed to keep me in line by my mothers!

Indeed:  “So then which superiors is Missy subject to and who is pulling her strings?”

@ichabod

on the omnireligious question, I tagged you on another thread…

Kindest, puro

 

[Anonymous @]

@suzannems

my mistake as post 41443 was meant for you too -and I didn’t @tag you correctly. There was an instance in which PhaseShift replied where I’d not been tagged right, either (on Into The Dalek).

This happens. My name aint easy! If you hover the mouse over the name you can tag a person that way also.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@arbutus  I’m pretty sure LeGuin took that model from the Israeli kibbutz practice of sending the kids to all day (and sometimes all night) day-care inside the kibbutz so their parents were available to take their required turns at the various kinds of work needed around the place.  I remember reading a mystery novel set in a kibbutz in the eighties, maybe (I don’t think many functional ones are left now), in which this version of an early childhood “boarding school” and its drawbacks was germane to the central crime, whatever it was — old grudges from childhood.  The story was also about the dismantling of the kibbutz movement that went along with the gradual shift away from the country’s socialist foundations (much bitterness about that too, in that novel).

@puro  I’ll go find the Omnireligious bit; thanks!

 

[Anonymous @]

Hi! I’m not sure whether I should write this here or not, but I hope it’s okay. I’m not translating Deep Breath into Japanese and had trouble in understanding some lines. So if anybody here help me, it would be great.

VASTRA
The establishment upstairs has been disabled with maximum prejudice, and the authorities summoned.

CLARA
Hang on, she called the police? We never do that, we should start.

THE DOCTOR
You see? Destroy us if you will, they’re still going to close your restaurant. That was going to sound better.

1. Is Clara saying that she and Dr. should call the police next time?

2. Does “they” in the Doctor’s line refer to Vastra team? If they close the restaurant, would the half-faced man be pleased?

Thanks in advance!

[IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan @pedant]

@Hmeow

1. Is Clara saying that she and Dr. should call the police next time?

Yes, but it is (scriptwriter’s) a joke.

2. Does “they” in the Doctor’s line refer to Vastra team? If they close the restaurant, would the half-faced man be pleased?

I think more a general reference to authority, rather then the Police or the Paternoster Gang. The half-faced man feels under attack, so I doubt he is pleased about much! 😉

[Anonymous @]

@pedant
Thank you for your answer. It helps a lot. Cheers!

[nerys @nerys]

Hubby and I watched this episode last night. I’d seen it multiple times, but this was hubby’s first viewing. He loved the layering of comical moments with dramatic ones, and also how this Doctor was introduced as quite vulnerable. Vulnerable in a different way than, say, Tennant, but still vulnerable and trying to get himself grounded in his latest regeneration. I’d remembered the broad strokes, but forgotten so many little details that added so much to the story. It was revisit that again.

[winston @winston]

@nerys  I loved Deep Breath for it’s comedy as you say layered between the drama. It was a great way to meet CapDoc for the first time. Having new Doctor anxiety after every regen, I am always on edge when I meet a new Doctor but after 10  or so minutes into the episode I thought “I like this new Doctor!” and I have enjoyed him since then. Thanks for reminding me how good this episode was…time for a rewatch.

[nerys @nerys]

@winston You’re welcome! It was good to revisit that episode again … as I should have typed in my previous post.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@nerys @winston  Now I’ve got to go look again . . . gosh, what a dreadful chore . . . Whatever happens next, we’ll always have S8 and S9, by gum, and to me that’s a joy and a wonder, come what may.  It feels like a victory for intelligence and perspicacity, that these things exist, warts and all, and the nitpickers and grinders can go chew on their own chops for all the good it does them.  We have landmark work, IMO.  It just warms the cockles of my thumpy old heart.

[badwolf11 @badwolf11]

Just wondering in this episode and a few others why the people don’t seem to notice when Vestra takes off her veil? She does this at the beginning when they are watching the dinosaur in the Thames but nobody seems to notice seems odd with that many people standing around that nobody would scream at the sight of a lizard person.

[Missy @missy]

@badwolf11

Good point, but as my husband would say “it’s in the script.” I must admit to not noticing this.

 

Missy

[MissRori @missrori]

@ichabod Hear hear!

I spent this past weekend at Wizard World Comic Con in Chicago.  I had a great time but there was some disappointment…even at the Doctor Who fan panel, there weren’t a lot of Twelve fans out and about, but there was chatter about how the show wasn’t as “magical” anymore, too dark and gloomy.  I felt heartsick to be at a panel where I felt left out.  It’s nice to be back here where my love of Twelve is seen as acceptable.  😉

Some people still don’t see him, I guess…

[ichabod @ichabod]

@badwolf11  On Vestra’s veil — Moffat and his writers often use something that, to me, goes back to Terry Pratchett’s Discworld books: the idea that people generally see what they’re used to seeing and expect to see, and miss the unexpected or misinterpret it as the expected anyway.  In a science fantasy show that works really well, of course, helping them to get away with outrageous stuff that in reality would send everybody running and screaming, or otherwise stop the action flat while people fainted and went into shock.  It goes along with goofy comedy carrying an underlying, serious reminder of grim reality and its dangers.

We’re meant to think of Vestra as so well adapted to the role she dresses for — the correct Edwardian (?) lady, full of the inbred confidence of her class to which others (the police boss, for instance) defer automatically — that nobody notices that she’s green and scaly behind that facade.  It’s all part of a related theme in Deep Breath — our common assumption that “what we see is what we get” when looking at others (the clockwork man is taken for a man, not a robot; Strax is accepted as a human servant, not a walking potato in a suit; etc.), whereas if we paused to *really look* at someone, we might at least glimpse the true nature and character of the soul living (or not) therein.

It ties right into the outwardly transformative nature of TL regeneration that’s so central to this episode: ” . . . just . . . see me.”  Vestra herself homes in on this in her scolding of Clara for recoiling from the Doctor because he no longer looks like Matt Smith, during which speech Vestra again removes her veil to underline the superficiality of a mere change of face and form.

[winston @winston]

@ichabod and @badwolf11  Ichabods answer was so good I have little to offer except to say that the theme of seeing what you expect to see is also there in the retaurant where we see people eating that turn out to be autons. Maybe even when the Doctor and Clara see a message in the paper and they both see the what they want to see. They were both wrong.

@missrori  There are plenty of CapDoc fans here and I am one of them. I like to think I saw him right away.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@missrori  Oh, ugh, sorry to hear about your disappointment at Comicon.  The thing is, I think, that however much comic books have “grown up” in recent decades (see Neil Gaiman’s Sandman series, for example, or the point at which the comic book Batman took a characterological dark turn that was supposed to change superhero comics forever), most comics, for most avid readers and collectors, remain pretty juvenile — true to their original style: action, wildly inflated violence, characters and situations kept simple to allow the easy thrills and schoolboy humor to rush along unimpeded.  The target audience has always been boys of all ages (much more than girls of any age), so nuance and realistic emotional range have never been salient features of the vast majority of comic book work.

That audience, by and large, isn’t going to be interested in the levels of sophistication and emotional ambition and complexity that Moffat and crew + Capaldi brought to S8 and S9 on TV.   Moffat said outright in an interview not long ago that what he’s been doing with those seasons is helping “Doctor Who” to grow up.  Comic book fans, probably like a majority of fans of superhero characters in any medium, are looking for exactly the opposite: endless  “fun” on (at most) an adolescent level.

Something very similar holds for science fiction literature.  One of the best SF conventions, Readercon, takes place near Boston every July, and I’ve gone to most of them.  Readercon was founded by a top editor (and fan!) in direct opposition to the increasingly screen-centered, superhero-worshiping nature of many local SF cons around the US, as “a convention for people who love to talk about good books” in the SF/F/H field.   Talented, exprimentally minded creatives are drawn to the frontiers of pop genres, where riches can be found by those daring to take chances and make changes.  But that work barely touches the hard central core of fans of those genres who like them just the way they were and more of the same, please, and turns of many of them.  IMO, we’ve just seen that happen with DW, and to me, the “fault” lies not in the maturity that AG Who developed, but in the inability of many fans — long-time as well as new — to appreciate and enjoy that change (although many, I think, were surprised to find that they grew to like 12/Clara/Moffat et al very much indeed, and that creates a different problem).

Wherever S10 goes, it’s going to take one he Hell of a trick to pull it off successfully for such a mixed bag of viewers. Good luck to ’em.  The talent is there, but I think they’re going to need the luck, too.

 

[Anonymous @]

@missrori

its epidemic isn’t it? That some ppl think Who lost its magic.

not true.

we have the first episode of the season with Twelve  coming in on a tank wearing sonic glasses and introducing his guitar at a medieval festival. How much more fun do you need?

osgood’s back with her humour and fun….

funny thing is, we were given so much magic in Kill the Moon , The Forest with a bunch of hilarious school kids whilst previous to that Clara met the wonderful and legendary Errol Flynn, oh ,wait, no she met the real live dude…and all his mates whilst Twelve remained not amused and disdainful of the ‘banter’.

funny, we get magic and ….magic and for those episodes we get fans hating it. When given superb drama, such as last year, it’s craven folly and “too dark”.

@ichabod, as a writer you’d recognise that within the ‘dark’ there is majesty, thrills and most of all that element within writing which is hard to produce well, and that’s hope.

i think the most recent season demonstrated that the Doctor refusing to submit to the Gallifreyan High Council, respectful of the ordinary people of his home planet, was a man desperate for hope, recognising his love of Clara, embracing his idiot in a box personality, adoring Rigsy’s little daughter and always, always , protecting his companion as far as he’s able to- even taking her to the end of the universe to escape any revenge from the High Council.

to me, the entire double season was filled with hope, magic, adventure and decency.

should that change the show could lose me as a fan – till then I’ll take all the bashings I read on The Graun, the Murdoch Presses and Comiccons filled with ‘temp fans’ who want things “the way they used to be” .

i think Who has always braved these critics and evolved despite them . I think it’s a show for a more particular market now which telly producers can effect with great success, more so in the US than the UK I believe.

that’s also a tag for @winston too. Apologies, this ‘think pad’ I’m using ain’t easy to think with.

kindest, PuroSolo

[Anonymous @]

@ichabod and @missrori

our posts crossed in the space time continuum. 🙂

yes, as, wot ichi sed. The show has grown up which, honestly, I think was necessary.

i can see that RTD tried his best to draw in old and new audiences- I wasn’t any kind of fan of Ecceslton (until A week ago on The Leftovers which isn’t relevant to this chat!) but I could understand how the re-boot helped change a certain way of thinking embedded in the show since the ’60s – whether the companion was more active, if she fell in love with Ten, whether others ‘moved’ into the Tardis etc….but it was Moffat who really tipped the Tardis upside down until everything rattled with excitement. And that moment it became my favourite show to watch…and then I found this Forum with a unique viewpoint- allowing everyone an opinion, young ,old , Australian 🙂 and it helped crystallise my attitudes to this little show.

when I joined I remember speaking about how it helped as a little girl after Mum passed away and now, looking back on a pretty good life, I can see how the show helped me over more recent obstacles?

if it does that even once for one person in ten, then I think it’s successful and part of that is this show changes But I think it’s less abrupt than we assume. It always -right from the 60s – harboured newness and quite a bit of shock value too. If fans think this show is static then they’re not watching Doctor Who!

i apologise for stating many of the many points expressed by @ichabod 🙂  – she tends to say it better than me but I must add my 15 cents whenever!

the ,ore fans like us who express agreement with Moffat and his style the luckier we all are. Like many people who are stuck in bed all day, or have reached an age where little that’s on telly appeals (most of it showing busty women in short skirts, nasty men with appalling humour etc) we need to stick together and cheer for our show. Hopefully we can protect it for those who come next and who love the rippling changes which Moffat and Co. happily provide and which will continue after his contract’s finished.

[winston @winston]

@puroandson   Who has not lost it’s magic! It may have grown up a little but why shouldn’t it? I am a Who fan, I love all the Doctors. How can you like one and not another if they are all the same Doctor? When we get a new Doctor I am excited to see where the new one will take us. 12 has taken us from wimsey to despair and back again. When I watch this Doctor I am transported to the Tardis to share his adventures and failures and for a little while I am taken away from any clamour and cheered. That there is magic.

 

[badwolf11 @badwolf11]

@ichabod Thanks for the answer. The funny thing is when I asked this last night I had just started watching the episode and was too tired to watch the whole thing. I had seen it before but had forgotten that part.

“when did you take off your veil” – “when you stopped seeing it”

[Anonymous @]

@winston

absolutely!

i believe every successful show needs magic in order to survive and be cherished.

to me, it’s like a friendship – a wonderful bizarre concoction of enduring humour, love, sentimental or sublime – with give and take and an absolute trust that what we give to the show and receive is doubled because of the spirit we give it. The show runners hold our little hearts in their huge hands and with every week we give a bit more and receive a lot back. It may be new, on some occasions confronting, other times it nearly breaks our hearts when dear characters are lost, but I think like a friend who moves away, remarries, changes her hair and starts a completely new career, the show -like the friend – is still there and if she shows up on your doorstep at 2am with tears streaming and luggage on her back , you’ll let her in.

Not out of pity but because you love her – her changes, gradual or abrupt, are embraced and we just trust her. I see this show very much like that.

purosolo.

[ichabod @ichabod]

@puroandson  Yes, purosolo, it does seem as if whatever you give them and no matter high the quality, they (that disdainful mob) really wanted something *else* — “fun” in its most familiar form, “magic” only if it doesn’t dance with not science, but an idea of science “appropriately” SFnl, but not too far-out, you know.  Bah.  They’re impossible people, and not in a good way (well, even Clara only came into her own once she stepped off the “impossible” pedestal and became all too possible, properly flawed, and well worth watching, IMO).

Wherever Moffat and crew and Capaldi take their stories in 2017, it will be fascinating.  We can’t actually have more of what we’ve just had — that story began with Deep Breath, and now it’s told (and what a story!).  Maybe they’ll turn to a full-blown confrontation with and on Gallifrey; or perilous reckonings with old opponents like Missy (we know she has a wonderful idea, right?).

In any case, I’ll stick with it as long as Capaldi is the Doctor — he’s a master of his craft, and how often do we get to see such a person at work, and with such a team?  Not often enough, is how often.  Besides — like you, puro solo, I rode out a tough time on the joy and power of S8-9, and that’s made a lifetime bond.  I was going through Big Stuff so I needed Big Stuff outside of myself to focus on, and DW gave me that.  Now they can all do pantomime, explosions, and cartwheels for the next decade, but that gift will still stands like those Singing Towers.  It can’t be un-given.  The future, as it is said by the wise, is promised to no one . . . Hmm.  More wine . . .

[Missy @missy]

@missrori         Some people still don’t see him, I guess…

There loss, our gain.

@ichabod: A very good point. Terry Prachett, had a way with words and with looking at the world. I’ve all his Disc World books.

@winston: Count me in on that one. *thumbs up*

@ichabod:      Wherever S10 goes, it’s going to take one he Hell of a trick to pull it off successfully for such a mixed   bag of   viewers. Good luck to ’em.  The talent is there, but I think they’re going to need the luck, too.

I’ve a sinking feeling that you might be right. On can only holds one’s breath and hope.

PuroSolo …..funny, we get magic and ….magic and for those episodes we get fans hating it. When given superb drama, such as last year, it’s craven folly and “too dark”.

People will always be people, and there is no hope of pleasing evceryone. I cannot understand why some viewers hate it so?

@puroandson:the ,ore fans like us who express agreement with Moffat and his style the luckier we all are. Like many people who are stuck in bed all day, or have reached an age where little that’s on telly appeals (most of it showing busty women in short skirts, nasty men with appalling humour etc) we need to stick together and cheer for our show. Hopefully we can protect it for those who come next and who love the rippling changes which Moffat and Co. happily provide and which will continue after his contract’s finished.

A very hearty hear, hear to that. I could quote and quote, all of you are saying what I feel.

Long live Peter Capaldi say I.

Missy

 

[MissRori @missrori]

Sorry I didn’t reply to all of you earlier — but your posts make me feel a lot better!  Thanks!

Also @puroandson (PuroSolo in particular), I think of “Listen” as another example of a “magical” Twelve-era story.  It’s darker than most, but it’s full of wonder and mystery and, at the end, tenderness.  I think that was the one that cemented my love of Twelve.

Thanks again!

[Anonymous @]

@missrori

thankyou, indeed we must love our heroes and love the magic. Listen WAS and is a terrific episode. I’d skipped over much of its magic because I was dwelling on so many other elements. It was a huge episode foreshadowing the future and I remember a few members here calling the outcome of this season because of that cluster of episodes.

[Author]

Posts