S33 (7) 12 – The Crimson Horror
Home › Forums › Episodes › The Eleventh Doctor › S33 (7) 12 – The Crimson Horror
This topic contains 475 replies, has 47 voices, and was last updated by 
-
AuthorPosts
-
6 May 2013 at 09:49 #7971
Anonymous @
@juniperfish “To be a pilgrim” signalled the arrival of the John Simm Master in one episode…can’t remember which
6 May 2013 at 09:53 #7972@juniperfish. I think it’s time for another bet with you. I don’t think Moffat will tie up those issues you mentioned – I suspect they will be utterly ignored. And I don’t think the Doctor will be walking back in his timeline, correcting things.
Are we on?
🙂
6 May 2013 at 10:15 #7975@fulcanelli – It was Human Nature/Family of Blood. I think it was in the first episode of that two-parter, but it might possibly have been the second.
Which would suggest to me that it’s another clue-and-or-red-herring. The hymn in that story isn’t planted or anything; it’s just a bit of foreshadowing. The Master’s nowhere near that Edwardian School (and that version of the song is 1906, so they’re fine to use it).
But the last time the hymn was used, we had a chameleon arched Time Lord a few episodes later. So we (as in fans who know the series in enough detail to recollect when the hymn was last used) are being teased with the possibility that the chameleon arch is in play. 🙂
6 May 2013 at 10:29 #7976“morning” all! (ah, we’re all a bit timey-wimey here…).
Loved the episode! And you’ve all mentioned the great stuff I liked (as well as a lot lot more as ever!).
May I just say though, that Gatiss has now taken 2 deep nods to “Horror Express” a film I mentioned in relation to Cold War.
In Crimson Horror we have the red monster, but also the belief that “the last image seen, is retained on the retina” (which is why they dig up the prehistoric monster in Horror Express).Now, if I knew more about that film, and hadn’t walked out of the room in deep fright at the tender age of 6(?) then I’d probably put it in the spoilers for the next Gatiss script!
6 May 2013 at 10:34 #7977@Shazzbot– regarding Victorian display- there really was, including very grotesque arrangements including baby skeletons holding preserved pieces of human organs. A kind of art meets parable (death comes to us all) meets scientific display. The Victorians were an interesting, and often unsettling people. (Then again so are we- the past might be a different country, but it’s the same planet…)
There was also a bit of an obsession with preserving corpses or at least the organs- for the most part in enable further anatomical study- usually using the bodies of criminals or people from the workhouse because of lingering beliefs in bodily resurrection- in other words, that you would need your body intact for the end of time.
What I like about this episode is the way the two are combined- preservation, to enable full bodily ‘resurrection’ at a later date. And the use of enormous bell jars bought this out nicely, because bell jars were used to kill specimens, I think.
6 May 2013 at 10:37 #7978@woolweed- re: gramophones- I think they were just a mock up of a working factory- no matches were being made, so they provided the sound of manufacture to cover up the real purpose.
6 May 2013 at 10:54 #7980@htpbdet I think we need to define what you mean by “save”. Clearly on a day to day basis, she’s been saving the docs bacon. However, I’m suggesting her duty of care may end when the doc gets to Trezidor.
When you say this is a copy of Rivers story last season, I think there’s crucial differences, if not actual mirroring. Rivers was working against her will to kill the doc, preventing him from getting to Trezidor. Clara could be operating without duress, keeping the doctor alive (and seems curiously well prepped to do the right thing at the right time…) to get him to Trezidor. But she has no concern for his long term well being (possibly).
Does Clara being a bad guy stop her later saving the doc? No. Could have a change of heart, she could be a double or triple agent. I’m not saying other bets are off, if anything probably several are on simultaneously.
I think the one thing we should be expecting is no straightforward motives, but wheels within wheels. Within wheels. Do factions want to stop the doctor getting to Trezidor? Do they want him dead? Or have they just gone to great lengths to make him think that?
The doctor has been shown to have been extremely duplicitous, why should we not think the same of everyone else? Apart from anything else, a few twists and double switchbacks are going to make this resolution much more entertaining.
If all that sounds like a lot of effort , consider for instance the history of Operation Mincemeat (amongst others): thousands of allied lives were deliberately sacrificed, whole bases pointlessly established, armies sent to nowhere, just to protect a greater lie – that we could not read Enigma encoded messages. Protecting that lie was more decisive to the war than winning any individual battle – though living with the ethics of that is horrifying… Sound familiar, perhaps?
Basically I’m questioning assumed certainties. Take Trezidor. Trap for the doctor? Or (like Rassilons promise of immortality) a trap of his own to bring his enemies out into the open? Either way, face must be maintained till the trap closes, even if it seems counter productive. You can’t trust anyone’s words, actions, allegiences or apparent motives. If there are clues at all, then, those aren’t the ones we can have faith in.
6 May 2013 at 11:08 #7983Perhaps.
I don’t see any basis for thinking that Clara won’t continue to save the Doctor and the very fact that the Doctor has given no indication he knows what she is for simply re-inforces that view.
The overt “trick or trap” makes it clear, I think, that she is neither.
In Season Six it was clear that the Doctor could not be killed at the Lake, and that whatever was going on River would go to jail for killing the Doctor. So what eventually happened was clear from almost the start (given what Octavian had to say about River in Forest of Dead) it was just the mechanics that were unclear.
Here, it seems clear that the Eleventh will fall at Trenzalore ( sorry if I am spelling it wrongly) and that Clara will save him, I suspect by the use of some time paradox which creates her as the Impossible Girl even though she arrives there already in that form. I don’t have a feel for the other detail, except the GI and the TARDIS will be involved. I am also reasonably sure that someone, possibly the TARDIS, possibly Clara, will sacrifice herself to save the Doctor.
I have babbled on in the Spoilers section about why I am thinking this way – but very happy to be wrong and to be shown to be wrong.
6 May 2013 at 11:14 #7984@miapatrick
Not wishing to be a pedant *puts on pedant’s wig and struts about* butregarding Victorian display- there really was, including very grotesque arrangements including baby skeletons holding preserved pieces of human organs. A kind of art meets parable (death comes to us all) meets scientific display
I think you mean the displays of Frederik Ruysch, see: http://www.zymoglyphic.org/exhibits/ruysch/ruysch1.jpg
who is much earlier – 17th/early 18th century. Ruysch perfected a method of preserving body parts, usually children as he worked as a man-midwife and was also the Amsterdam coroner so could get his hands on them more easily. You’re right that his work is about the intransigence of life, with little mottos such as ‘Life is but a bubble’. Before you ask, part of my degree dissertation covered his work (well it was art college after all).
There was a lot of experimentation regarding preservation, but it’s far more disturbing than that. Here’s a wikipedia link to Hannah Beswick the ‘Manchester Mummy‘ a bit earlier again, but she was still ‘hanging about’ until the mid 19th century. My favourite is Mrs Van Butchell though. Her husband Martin Van Butchell was, to be fair, a bit bonkers. Here he is on his horse:
If I recall, for special occasions he’d paint it purple with yellow spots and ride it about town.
6 May 2013 at 11:24 #7987@chickenelly – liking the wig! It suits you!
6 May 2013 at 11:28 #7989@chickenelly – did you have to glue the top hat on? 🙂
(apparently, Strax’s top hat had to be glued down)
6 May 2013 at 11:48 #7993@haveyoufedthefish & @bluesqueakpip
My fetching wig and top hat are held on the same way as Frankie Howerd’s ‘hair’ and the occasional wig he’d stick on top of that. Either that or by the power of Photoshop.
6 May 2013 at 11:49 #7994@whisht – make that 4 deep nods to Horror Express: the prehistoric parasite cannot survive without a host and makes victims eyes blank white without pupils or irises.
6 May 2013 at 11:50 #7996@chickenelly. That is just brilliant. How many blogs on Doctor Who can you rely on to get an informative tutorial on art history?
And I am not being scarcastic; I really am impressed. And enlighted by your post, actually.
But mostly…I am envious of your avatar…
6 May 2013 at 11:57 #7998The Doctor was very sure about Clara not being killed by the toxin so it could mean that he knows that she isn’t human because he survived the toxin because he was Time Lord.
6 May 2013 at 11:58 #7999Bit of a callback but the discussions on Caliburn House and The Library? Cal: I burn.
In the history of the show, have people explicitly referred to The Doctor by his regenerations? Just wondered from all the speculation on ‘fall of the Eleventh’.
Has the sliver of ice gone after Journey then? Has the (possible) role of music/sound been mentioned before?
Bells – Well, bells to rouse him.
TROA – The eternal lullaby/lyrical history.
CW – Ultravox. OK, just time setting? Unless as reminder of Skaldak’s daughter, lyrical history again.
Hide – Music room, the (other) heart with a cold spot.
JttCotT – Finding the right point to fix everything.
CH – Time setting again? Overlooking the ‘error’.
Oh, and AOTD with music to keep hold of humanity?None of that might mean anything!
6 May 2013 at 12:06 #8000@satsumajoe – “Hide – Music room, the (other) heart with a cold spot.”
Oooh, good catch. Nice symmetry – and the Doctor made a big circle around the cold spot, then Clara ran right through it.
And that circled cold spot wasn’t mentioned again, just like the slither of ice in his heart hasn’t been mentioned again …
6 May 2013 at 12:13 #8001I knew all those years at art college weren’t wasted. Who’d have thought when I graduated all those years ago that I’d be able to use my skills on the Doctor Who forum blogs by fashioning a very fetching avatar (thank you) and dribble on about obscure 18th & 19th century eccentrics.
Speaking of avatars, mine is in need of a temporary revamp to mark the end of the series, hmmm *thinks….*
6 May 2013 at 12:17 #8002@whohar – reposting from the Graun, because we’re onto post seven-hundred-and-odd there…
I think the whole ‘red not dead’ part was provided for two purposes. One – to give a visual representation of the Doctor as a ‘monster’ – and furthermore, a monster who is isolated, helpless and unable to rescue himself.Two, to show that the Doctor-as-monster doesn’t need a ‘special companion’ to save him. Ada doesn’t even know him. She just reaches out to this helpless guy who can only hold her hand. By herself, all she can do is keep him alive and harmless (the restraints).
Jenny does know him – but when she rescues him, she doesn’t know she’s rescuing ‘The Doctor’. She just helps this poor bugger who’s probably been unjustly imprisoned.
So you’ve got the typical companion role (keep the Doctor alive and mostly harmless) combined with an actual companion who doesn’t know who she’s rescuing. The suggestion is that the Doctor could allow himself to stop being the ‘Deus Ex Machina’ and realise that he’s part of the universe, not its designated saviour. And if he does that, other people will try to save him; because that’s what the decent people do.
I thought the sonic was just used to switch the de-petrifying machinery on. The Doctor can’t talk, so he can’t say ‘press the Big Friendly Button, no not that one, that one’. He has to use the sonic.
6 May 2013 at 12:28 #8004ah @fulcanelli – you managed to get through more pf that film than I obviously!!
You have a strong constitution (or weren’t ~6 when you saw it!)
;¬)
6 May 2013 at 12:33 #8005Hey @satsumajoe – music has indeed been pondered before!
Quite a few people here have had theories involving it – one great one in terms of the dualities throughout the series (red/ blue; good/ bad; heart/ intellect; love/ hate etc etc) was:
silence / music (kudos to @bobbyfat for that one!).
6 May 2013 at 12:51 #8007@satsumajoe – The Doctor is often the only person in-show who knows he regenerates – exceptions are Companions who’ve known him over more than one regeneration, such as Sara Jane and the kids, Clan Lethbridge-Stewart and (in Nu-Who), Rose. I think that the Eleventh Doctor is the first to continually make jokes about his being No. 11.
It may have a wider significance, or it may just be that he finds the idea of being ‘up to eleven’ a good joke. 🙂 But the reference to ‘fall of the Eleventh’ may show that ‘The Doctor’ is now so famous, people have researched him enough to know that 11 is ‘the Eleventh’.
6 May 2013 at 13:02 #8008I’ve just responded to your post on the G. I knew this could become complicated.
@bluesqueakpip 06 May 2013 12:13pm. Get cifFix for Chrome.I thought the sonic was just used to switch the de-petrifying machinery on
Yes, I am coming round to that viewpoint too.
red not dead
I initially thought it was Gatiss indulging himself with the Frankenstein riff and still think that may be the case. Of course it also allowed the Doctor-as-monster theme that’s been recurring in the series for some time to be revisited. Plus it allowed the Doctor to appear in the dead Thursday’s eye.
I did wonder what Ada’s motivation was in keeping the Doctor. Loneliness perhaps. Similarly with Jenny letting him out. An act of compassion certainly but also of bravery.6 May 2013 at 13:15 #8010@chickenelly– doh! I did know that at one point. Top pedantry.
See, this forum is educative and fun.
I nearly mentioned Bentham skeleton, dressed in his clothes which he wished to have topped with his mummified head, but the rather poorly preserved physical head now resides in proper gothic/horror story style, at his feet.
I did wonder if this last episode was also supposed to make us think of the plasticisation process perfected recently, which is really something people have been working towards for centuries, albeit not with that material.
6 May 2013 at 13:27 #8011Oh, another literary reference: Horrors of Oakendale Abbey contain a scene worth of Japanese Horror, where a young woman sees what seems to be a monster or undead, but it turns out
(this is spoilers)
that it is there result of a botched hanging, who revived before the resurrection men had a chance to sell his body for dissection.
6 May 2013 at 13:51 #8013Aaah, the lovely Bentham. Unfortunately his head is no longer on display *adjusts wig* as some students pinched it during rag week. They got it back but have put it out of harm’s way. For gothic fans here is Jezza.
Before you ask, I used to work for the university which the said students studied at…
6 May 2013 at 13:59 #8014Educational indeed, love it 🙂 Gruesome stuff, and way before Damien Hurst
And thanks for the help re how the Dr gets “normalised”. It makes sense that there would be machine to reverse the process since Mrs G’s plan involved using her “Adam and Eves” to repopulate the planet. So, wild guess – the process was intended to a) immunise and in some cases b) preserve like a waxwork for beautiful under-glass displays, possibly in suspended animation. It didn’t work on the Dr cos he’s not human, it did work on Clara – she wasn’t one of the red rejects – but the Dr could reverse the process to revive her (as intended in longer term by Mrs G).
And the Dr knew where to find the reversing cubicle cos he spent a fair bit of time snooping about before he got caught. If it’s just a hard outer casing then steaming it off also makes sense.
re Ada – I think her motivation is clear – she’s desperate to love and be loved. The Dr, although he seems like a monster, shows her a tiny scrap of common humanity when their hands touch. She gets so little back – she doesn’t know him, he can’t speak, he can hardly move, yet it’s so much more of a family than she’s exerienced before.
PS LOL @ Red or Dead
6 May 2013 at 14:06 #8017Can’t think where Dan Martin gets the idea that we have “intense speculative discussion on everything but what’s happening in the episodes”
harrumph!
😉
6 May 2013 at 14:06 #8018@chickenelly– well that’s just cheating 😉
Shame really- can’t quite find it in me to blame the students, though.
If it had been me I would have just removed the fake head, and put the mummified one under his arm…
6 May 2013 at 14:37 #8020Can’t think where Dan Martin gets the idea that we have “intense speculative discussion on everything but what’s happening in the episodes”
Damn right. So. What’s everyone’s favourite recipes? 😀
6 May 2013 at 14:41 #8021@miapatrick – it was students from Kings College London who nicked it – they have a traditional rivalry with University College London as Kings was set up to combat UCL’s godless atheism.
@chickenelly – I got kicked out from UCL, but I still remember trotting past Jeremy Bentham on my way to lectures.
6 May 2013 at 14:58 #8022Excellent links @chickenelly. For anyone who is interested, the general themes of preservation and display were pretty well covered by “History Cold Case”. For those who haven’t seen it a great little BBC factual programme about the work of an anthropology department looking at unusual Human Remains.
The “mumified child” episode looks at a child specimen from the period and gives an overview of the way the bodies were obtained, including one charmer who decided to avoid the tedious business of waiting for people to die, and helped them along. One of your links discription of the blood being replaced by “a mixture of turpentine and vermilion” put me in mind of it, as the team tried to track down the likely creator of the body by comparing the chemical composition of the mixture against known recipes favoured by various embalmers.
I found it fascinating. The episode is available on YouTube (about 60mins).
6 May 2013 at 15:03 #8023@haveyoufedthefish– jammy dodgers and fishfingers trifle!
6 May 2013 at 15:25 #8024@htpbdet – 100% agree with your precis of Season Six! But this season is different – if there has been an equivalent of Rivers bald “imprisoned for murdering the best man in the Universe” statement that semaphores the resolution, so far I’d say we’ve yet to agree we’ve spotted it, even if it is in plain sight.
This time round we’ve no real evidence yet he even makes it to Trenzalore (your spelling is right, my Ipads is … eccentric!) yet (though its heavily implied – which usually means the opposite :D), or that “the fall” is a prophecy* that has any truth to it (A lot of very powerful people worry about judgement day. Doesn’t mean its ever going to happen, even if they try their hardest to pave the way)
Another thing I’m pretty sure about is that although I think elements of classic who (such as Susan) might be incidentally referenced (like the Brig and his daughter, the London underground tin etc) as nice little fan-service callouts to reward the old guard, but I don’t think they will be central to any plot.
The central elements will now always be from the canon, events and characters established since 2005 imho. The mystery of Clara will be explicable (by which I mean not pulled out of a 50yr old hat) in plot points recognisable to someone who has no idea that Who existed before 2005, because they are the fans that matter, not us old farts with 20ft scarfs in the backs of our wardrobes. As the Moff says – its about looking forward, not back.
At first glance, SJS looks like an good refutation of that, but if you look at how that’s written, it’s not actually important that it’s SJS – any previous (even non canon) previous companion would have done. The plot point her character fulfilled was to show that the Doc moves on from companion to companion – no matter how close they were – and doesn’t look back (which Rose realised, slightly to her horror).
Even the Daleks are only referenced time-war onwards (nu who canon), never before that (except as incidental call-outs like “Exxillon”).
But non of that stop us dreaming up our own wish-fulfilment full blown tie-ins to classic who, and much fun it is too, both to cook up and to read! Please please please keep them coming!
I personally would have said Susan (or any classic ref) could still have been a contender if they had been dropping more hints over the last few eps to establish her in his history inside nu-who, so when finally reintroduced, it won’t feel like it came out of nowhere. But with a few eps to go, that’s looking increasingly unlikely, imho – one passing mention of her name in Rings isn’t enough. We’ll see though – still everything to play for!
* I can understand why both Moff and RTD drop in prophecies to generate some dramatic tension (hello Hamlet!), but in the context of a Time Travel show, aren’t they inherently silly? No sure if prophecy is true? Pop forward a few years, read the papers, pop back. Simples!
6 May 2013 at 15:46 #8025@haveyoufedthefish – taking up your point that any companion would have done for school hard; it isn’t Susan as a character who’s likely to be central to the plot and/or subplot.
It’s her function as the Doctor’s granddaughter that’s likely to be central. I’m sure most Nu-Who fans wouldn’t recognise the name; but they should, if they follow the series, be aware that the Doctor has had children and grandchildren, and thinks that they’re all dead. That’s been referenced throughout Nu-Who, and the audience was carefully reminded of it in Rings. And The Doctor’s Daughter. And The Empty Child. And (if you were paying attention), there’s that empty cot in the TARDIS, seen in A Good Man Goes To War and again in Journey.
Moffat might use Susan, or he might use the Doctor’s clone daughter Jenny. But he’s referencing the Doctor’s lack-of-living-children fairly frequently.
6 May 2013 at 16:56 #8028Thinking about it, that cot is probably the saddest thing in the whole TARDIS. Just the thought that the Doctor can’t bear to throw away what was – almost certainly – the cot his granddaughter slept in. His dead granddaughter.
It’s enough to make me go all sniffly. 🙁
6 May 2013 at 17:13 #8029@Bluesqueakpip – as always, I’m coming at this as nuWho afficianado and Classic Who ignorant.
What makes you think Susan slept in that cot? The Doctor, in AGMGtW, recognised it as his own cot. Is there anything in Classic Who canon that says the Doctor ripped Susan away from Gallifrey whilst she was still an infant?
My own personal sentiment is that it is his own cot, and no-one else’s. However, that begs the question of why, when he was running from Gallifrey – grabbing his granddaughter on the way to stealing [erm, borrowing] a Tardis – he made time to scoop up his own baby cot?
The children/grandchildren/n^grandchildren (cf Hide) meme in this series is pretty strong; I agree with that. (Speaking of ‘Hide’ – what the F was that episode named for? No-one was hiding or needed to hide in that story, even the Doctor.) But other comments on this site about how Clara cannot be Susan have started bells in my mind. If what everyone is saying is true, and this series will indeed wrap up with the next two episodes and the 50th anniversary movie is separate, then that signals that any contribution that Susan has will be left to the anniv special.
I don’t trust a word that comes out of S Moffat’s mouth (@ardaraith) about Who, though. My personal bet is on this series leading directly into the 50th anniv special, and all the loose ends (that S Moffat cares to clean up) will be addressed in that feature-length episode which ties knots, creates new knots, and as he has said, will be backward-sympathising and forward-looking.
6 May 2013 at 17:28 #8031I think it’s time for another bet with you. I don’t think Moffat will tie up those issues you mentioned – I suspect they will be utterly ignored. And I don’t think the Doctor will be walking back in his timeline, correcting things.
Are we on?
Well now, that’s cheating. I was simply riffing on one of many possibilities rather than laying out my definitive predictions for the finale/ 50th! I prefer the two universes/ realities bleeding together theory to the re-writes theory.
I will bet, for the finale/ 50th (which I’m thinking of as a bit of a two-parter) that we will see a “dark Doctor” of some description, and that the Daleks, the GI, the Silence, the Angels and the Master will all make an appearance (not so sure about the last two but wth).
Oh, and I’ll also throw in that Clara is a Pond of some description.
Virtual tipple of choice again?
How’s that! 🙂
6 May 2013 at 17:42 #8032However, that begs the question of why, when he was running from Gallifrey – grabbing his granddaughter on the way to stealing [erm, borrowing] a Tardis – he made time to scoop up his own baby cot?
@Shazzbot – that’s why I think it was a ‘family’ cot, and Susan slept in it. He wasn’t scooping up the cot, he was scooping up her – like you might quickly grab the baby, still in the car seat, from the car.
6 May 2013 at 17:56 #8033@Shazzbot (Speaking of ‘Hide’ – what the F was that episode named for? No-one was hiding or needed to hide in that story, even the Doctor.)
I thought it referred to the secrets people hid, truths obscured from intent (Professor Palmer) or accident (the ‘monster’). It could also tie to ‘a hide’ (think that idea was mentioned before) for viewing in light of the photo from that episode appearing in this one?
@juniperfish the Daleks, the GI, the Silence, the Angels and the Master will all make an appearance (not so sure about the last two but wth).
Was there mention of that drumming from the spilled Encyclopedia Gallifreya? If I heard right, I’d like to think that wasn’t just throwaway but wouldn’t it also mean the Time Lords returning?
6 May 2013 at 18:00 #8034@juniperfish – I’ll take your bet even though it wasn’t directed at me. I have scrumptious vodka-and-squash martinis [honestly, they’re better than that sounds 🙂 ] and I have some lovely mini-martini glasses.
Oswin Oswald was introduced as a character in ‘the last of the Ponds’ series, but I don’t think that means anything about her being a Pond.
However, your red-blue dichotomy is surely canon by now. Even the opening spacey-atmospheric colours have changed from blue to red – and that can’t be chance. The reds of Clara’s episodes are striking, too. Whether the Doctor meets himself as a baddie, well, that’s up for grabs – and if so, it’s been trumpeted since AGMGtW. So not an enormous surprise. But previous series have already set him up for being a catalyst for ‘endless bitter war’ so I’m hoping for something completely different.
As much as I want to see some reference, at all, to Lorna Bucket, I fear her story will be left on the ‘what might have been’ pile, as well as a host of other untied ends (@htpbdet “I suspect they will be utterly ignored.”) . The Doctor already walked back through his timeline in the last series, and S Moffat doesn’t want a faint ghost (see what I did there?! cf Glenda Slagg) of his previous triumphs. He’s also under enormous pressure – I assume – to reel in the American and other global audiences for Who.
So:
– Dark Doctor as the baddie – quite likely.
– red/blue differentials – most certainly.
– Clara as a Pond – computer says no.
– Clara as a future Doctor – 50/50.
– Susan in some form appears, to relate 50 years of Who with the new series – oh, definitely.6 May 2013 at 18:10 #8035@SatsumaJoe – you are the star of lateral thinking! ‘Hide’ indeed as a photographic term.
6 May 2013 at 18:15 #8036@Shazzbot, @bluesqueakpip I thought the cot was the Doctor’s own baby cot. I had kind of assumed that was something he picked up as a memento of his childhood/family on some trip to Gallifrey (maybe during the Time War?).
6 May 2013 at 18:16 #8037But @Bluesqueakpip – “He wasn’t scooping up the cot, he was scooping up her – like you might quickly grab the baby, still in the car seat”
Again, is there anything in Classic Who canon which refers to the [Susan’s] age at which the Doctor and Susan started travelling? I’m not being argumentative, I just don’t know. Did they just appear on Earth in the early 60’s, with Susan being a teenager? Or were there any later episode-based details which fleshed this out some more?
Or … is that what the 50th anniversary movie is all about – FINALLY discussing how they came to be travelling in the Tardis? [with the Doctor’s carry-cot]
6 May 2013 at 18:39 #8038@zaphod– I’m struggling with the difference between the annoying Douglas Adams character, and the scattily charming eedjit Sam Rockwell portrayed in that otherwise hideous movie. I prefer to think of you as the latter! (charming of course; eedjit, not at all 🙂 )
So, it’s possible that The Doctor swung back to Gallifrey for his cot? Is there anything in the Classic Who canon which suggests this might be likely? Otherwise, we have to assume that he swept off Gallifrey with his own carry-cot in hand.
And as a Nu-Who … no, as A REGULAR FAN … I would really like to learn more about the Time War and that gap between 8, and 9 meeting Rose.
Of course, @htpbdet– 11 may not be walking back in his timeline, correcting things, but hopefully he will be providing a running commentary of said proceedings 😉
6 May 2013 at 19:28 #8040Canonically – the cot is the Doctor’s own cot (A Good Man Goes To War)
However, it is a) a bit strange he should have his own cot on board and b) we have no idea how old Susan was when she and the Doctor fled Gallifrey. This has therefore led to c) the currently theoretical (but pretty popular) idea that his cot’s on board because it was also Susan’s cot.
Which would make it a family cot, passed down through the generations – which also explains why he wants to keep it. 🙂
6 May 2013 at 21:03 #8042@Bluesqueakpip Hmm. I thought it was fairly obvious that it was a family cot and that young Melody was only intended be the the latest user, not the second.
6 May 2013 at 21:25 #8043@pedant – I thinks everyone thinks it pretty obvious, but if you were to try and find a line – there ain’t one. So it’s not official.
6 May 2013 at 22:24 #8045@bluesqueakpip @pedant @shazzbot @zaphod – I agree a family heirloom is a lovely idea, but so far @bluesqueakpip is right, its just an wishful idea so far.
Here’s a thought – maybe he went back to gallifrey for it (whilst busily erasing all traces of his given name?) simply because his name was written on it, but didn’t have the heart to simply destroy it (maybe he just thought doing so would upset his mum, rather than having sentimental to himself), so took with him.
No (unlikely?) scooping up of cot whilst fleeing gallifrey required…
6 May 2013 at 22:34 #8046I’m wondering if this thread is lighter than previous because it’s a bank holiday weekend here in the UK, or if CH was such a self-contained story that there wasn’t enough bonkers-theorising-meat on its bones to chew on.
Now that we’re all on the same page with the decontamination showers, and agree that the eye pictures showed two completely different Doctors, and have expressed our love for the magnificent mother/daughter acting and Jenny’s kick-arse kung fu, and agreed [or not] that Tom-Tom and erect sonic were indeed very fine jokes, and were educated about Frederik Ruysch and Martin Van Butchell … what now except a very long wait to the penultimate episode?
But I still wonder what the episode name ‘Hide’ was really all about. 🙂 And who took all those pictures of Clara in her travels. And whether ‘Trenzalore’ is really a physical place, or something else. And is there more than one Doctor about? And are we seeing events in the order they actually happened? And what’s with the anachronistic hymns?
Egads, there is still so much to theorise about!
-
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
