Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
24 September 2014 at 11:59 #32468
The character of Susan is a narrative gold mine.
Agreed. The continual fascination with Susan shows one main point – her story feels unfinished. Leaving with David wasn’t an ending – it was the beginning of a new kind of life. Romana and Jenny both have the same sort of feeling.
They’re the characters the fans think could come back – and because we know they could, we keep speculating whether they will.
There’s also a technical reason for the fascination with Susan: at some point, every keen watcher of Doctor Who checks out ‘An Unearthly Child’ and wonders ‘what happened to the granddaughter?’
23 September 2014 at 23:02 #32455@juniperfish – hope you’re feeling better?
As far as I can work out, the Doctor’s Grandchild Stakes are:
Clara: the favourite – pros are that she’s very similar to the Doctor in many ways. Cons: two – the whole ‘boyfriend’ thing and the fact that the TARDIS really doesn’t like her.
Danny Pink: bit of a late entrant, but his background (Creepy Children’s Home) is similar to River’s (and possibly to the Doctor’s). He also fits the ‘traumatised ex-soldier’ model, and is proud of the work he did saving people.
Courtney: the outsider. Two things made me wonder about her: firstly she says Clara’s face is too wide. Then a few scenes later the Doctor says Clara’s face is too wide. Secondly, she’s been introduced in very much the same way as Susan was. She’s the pupil that two teachers at Coal Hill keep thinking about and discussing. Courtney, like Susan, even gets to star in her own flashback.
Courtney could simply be a shout-out to An Unearthly Child; the teachers who are/may be the Companions are, this time around, discussing a very Earthly Child. Every school has a Courtney.
But we’ve now got our cast members from the original show. One female teacher, one male teacher, one pupil and the Doctor.
23 September 2014 at 13:48 #32426The paradox is actually Karabraxos.
She couldn’t have called the Doctor without getting his number but she couldn’t have got his number without calling him!Yup, that’s the paradox. It’s a self-consistency variation of Polchinski’s Paradox, which Moffat uses so often he must have Professor Polchinski on speed dial. 😉 Polchinski’s original paradox would have the Doctor not realising he’d given Young Karabraxos the phone number, so that the eternal loop breaks. The question then becomes: ‘how can she get the phone number?’
The self-consistency paradox works (as was shown by two CalTech students) if the actions within the loop create the conditions to maintain the loop… the Doctor realises there’s a loop, and gives her his phone number, so that she can phone him, thus creating the loop … yeah, your head may explode. 😈
But it’s the same problem as the Doctor’s escape in The Big Bang. Nobody lets him out ‘the first time’ so he can create the loop. He realises he’s in a loop and acts in a way that maintains the loop rather than breaking it.
22 September 2014 at 22:34 #32378@handles – nobody needs to make it happen. The Doctor has a time machine that knows a call from the future might need to be routed through to the past. The call came through the TARDIS.
So, the way it works. Old Karabraxos calls the Doctor. The TARDIS realises this call is about an event that happened in the past, when Clara was travelling with the Doctor. She routes the call to that particular past time when Clara is travelling with the Doctor. Just to be certain, she routes it to a space/time when the Doctor and TARDIS are actually in Clara’s flat.
Events proceed as per script; near the end the Doctor gives Young Karabraxos his phone number, with a note that he time travels (he’s worked it out). She then travels forward through time by the slow route, realises when dying that she really wishes she hadn’t let the Teller’s race die out, and phones the Doctor.
The call reaches the TARDIS, who realises that this is to an event that happened in the past…
…I could do a diagram. 😉
22 September 2014 at 14:22 #32361Anyone else spot how the Doctor was visibly out of breath after the traditional run through the corridors sequence.
Yup. It’s noticeable that they’re asking the 50+ Capaldi to do a lot less running than the 20+ and 30+ previous AG Doctors 😉
But if they don’t adjust stuff to fit the actor, we’re going to be permanently confined to Doctors aged 40 and under. Whereas if Capaldi can swing it (and the reaction so far suggests he can), then we’re back to a Doctor who can be played by an actor of any age. Whether that’s as young as Smith and Davison, as old as Capaldi, or playing older than actual age like Hartnell.
21 September 2014 at 23:15 #32339@spider @jimbomcmaster – Children of Earth flashback, check!
21 September 2014 at 22:47 #32337@arbutus – the time traveller’s a given. It’s sort of embedded in the format. 😉
21 September 2014 at 22:30 #32335@gothamcelt – well, I found the episode a bit on the dull side, but the bank had a guard that sucked your brains out.
And I don’t think that needing a shape shifting mutant, a bomb, a computer specialist and a massive solar storm counts as ‘simply walking in’. 😉
That said, I know what you mean. Twice now, I’ve tried to watch it and twice now I’ve wandered out for a cup of tea in the middle…
21 September 2014 at 20:51 #32315@pedant – of course, the Terry Pratchett version is that there are THREE quantum states. The cat is dead, the cat is alive, the cat is absolutely bloody furious.
😉
21 September 2014 at 16:34 #32299@craig – that’s good to hear. Pass on my best wishes and my hopes that RL gets sorted out soon.
He’s made a brilliant contribution to this site and I’d be heartbroken if I thought I’d helped contribute to some kind of last straw.
21 September 2014 at 16:24 #32298The so-called “riots” in Glasgow on Fri for example which went round the world were much exaggerated as far as I can ascertain
Been there, done that. I well remember one ‘riot’, reported as such on the national news, which basically boiled down to ‘a few idiots throwing bottles’. Bottles in a recycling bin which seemed to be strangely accessible – considering that everyone knew there was going to be a protest.
Funny, really. All those bottles, just waiting to be thrown… to this day, I’m not entirely sure which side managed to set that one up.
21 September 2014 at 16:05 #32293@pedant – I think the truly quantum thing about the two times streams/one misunderstood time stream conundrum is that it’s an excellent illustration of Schroedinger’s paradox. Namely, the time stream (s) is/are currently in a state of quantum superposition where it/they is/are both two and one at the same time.
I’m for two, partly because it fits better with the Many Universes theory (and we know there are Many Universes in Doctor Who). A decision as major as the destruction of Gallifrey should have split the universe; one universe where the Doctor chose genocide, one where he didn’t.
It makes sense to me that The Moment would be advanced enough to siphon the unwanted option off into a closed loop universe.
However, the precise number of time streams is currently like that bloody cat. Until we open the box, both options are (paradoxically) open.
😀
21 September 2014 at 08:47 #32254Jim, if you’re still lurking – come back!
21 September 2014 at 00:20 #32228@theatreguy – well, Clara did have her memory wiped in another Stephen Thompson script – Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS. That was the episode where she both saw The History of The Time War (‘So that’s who…) and the Doctor’s name ( on that little tiny…).
And it was very carefully established that The Teller brings buried/blocked/suppressed memories to the surface.
20 September 2014 at 22:58 #32217@scaryb – no, still want a cup of tea about twenty minutes in. 😉
@theatreguy I think the most important implication about Clara’s memories isn’t the memories as such – it’s that she’s feeling incredibly guilty about something. Both times, the Teller locks on to Clara.
They give her an in-story reason to feel guilty – she’s gone on a date with the Doctor rather than with Danny – but she seems to feel guilty about something she can’t remember. Very, very guilty.
20 September 2014 at 20:40 #32191Really weird and definitely one I may like more on a rewatch.
It’s not that Stephen Thompson is a bad writer – I enjoyed his Sherlock scripts – but so far I haven’t liked his Who scripts. They always feel as if they should be huge fun; that everything’s in place for a fun and exciting time – and then things are just slightly ‘off’, so that it turns into an episode-by-numbers.
Anyway, I started to find the central conceit a bit irritating about twenty minutes in. It’s a bad sign when I wander out of the room to put the kettle on; I’m normally glued to the telly for the entire episode. What I wanted was more information placed a bit earlier.
Thankfully, I really liked Capaldi’s Doctor in this. I said last week over on the Graun that I thought ‘Listen’ had cemented him as ‘The Doctor’ for me; yup. Definitely – he was ‘The Doctor’, even with a script I didn’t much like.
So, now we know how Gretchen ended up in ‘Heaven’. That teleport, with scream, is exactly the same effect. She didn’t die; she was teleported.
20 September 2014 at 19:12 #32170I think this may have been posted in Music Thread 1, but it’s always worth a repost.
Can’t think why it’s running through my head right now. 😈
20 September 2014 at 14:39 #32156@scaryb – family squabbles are always a bit fraught. 😉
I agree – everyone seems to keep forgetting there’s a General Election coming up. I keep reading a lot of comments on the Graun that seem to assume the Conservatives are locked in place for the next twenty years.
They’re not: the reason there’s a Coalition is that, politically, everything is up for grabs.
The turnout for the Referendum shows that when people have to vote on something that will make a difference, they will turn out in huge numbers.
Personally, I find our present political elite quite terrifying (all of them, Labour and Conservative) because they’ve done nothing else BUT politics. Right up to and including Brown, every Prime Minister had done another job outside politics. They all started outside what you might call ‘Westminster’.
But this little bunch all started as researchers or lobbyists. They started inside ‘Westminster’, they know no other world than that little section that lives and breathes politics. Which is incredibly scary (without the B) because, ultimately, politics is about helping to keep the real world running; the one that doesn’t live and breathe politics beyond what’s necessary to work and have fun and bring up their kids in peace.
20 September 2014 at 13:59 #32151An awful lot of the reaction to the entire referendum has been nothing more than petulance and bruised ego and resentment that the Scots would have the temerity to even ask to leave,
Gee, thanks. 😉
Who are ‘the English’?
Seriously, who are ‘the English’ that you’re accusing of bruised ego and resentment, because you’re talking about leaving them?
Very often they are your nieces and your nephews and your cousins and grandchildren. They are Peter Capaldi’s daughter and Steven Moffat’s young sons. They are the people who’ve gone to school with you, who went on holiday with you, who’ve worked with you, who’ve fought with you. After three hundred years of union and four hundred years of a joint kingdom, there are very few ‘English’ who are not related to ‘Scots’ by blood.
You know, on Friday, I’ve never seen so many people looking relaxed and happy. Not triumphant – relieved. Happy. ‘The English’ are very happy that you’re staying. We don’t want to force you to stay, but we want you to stay.
Anyway: the General Election is on 7th May 2015. You have a big voting bloc and the possibility of holding the balance of power in Westminster. Stop moaning about getting shafted and start working towards NOT getting shafted.
Just because Devo Max isn’t currently on the table, it doesn’t mean you can’t work to put it there.
20 September 2014 at 10:12 #32147Do we think that Moffat knows and/or cares about Goethe and the whole Urfaust/Faust thing?
He’s an English graduate of Glasgow University; it’s quite possible that he’s either read Goethe’s Faust (or studied the plotline) to compare it with Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus. And you certainly study earlier versions.
Or, he may have seen the opera. There was a production by the ENO back in 2011.
[I forgot to add that Arthur Darvill played Mephistopheles in Marlowe’s version during the break between filming Series 6 and 7. It’s unthinkable that Moffat didn’t go and see that.]
19 September 2014 at 23:56 #32121@jimthefish – Salmond was right to go; he was about to become a liability. Because you do need someone to fight your corner – and he’s now seen in England as anti-English. It’s a sign of how good he is at politics that he recognised he’s actually the last person you need right now.
Nicola Sturgeon, who I’d guess is probably going to take the leadership of the SNP, is much less ‘toxic’.
As to comprehensively screwed over – not as comprehensively as you would have been in the event of a Yes vote. 1.6 million people so pissed off they wanted to leave – and who are they going to vote for? The Scottish MPs could very easily hold the balance of power in the next government; you’ve got a big, important voting bloc if you just stick together and start going for Devo Max.
Especially since a lot of the people who voted No would probably also be quite happy with Devo Max.
19 September 2014 at 20:00 #32099@drben – alternatively, Nine went on a history tour between dematerialising the TARDIS when Rose turned him down, and coming back to give her a second chance.
19 September 2014 at 16:39 #32088@RickGreen and @drben
Any information derived from a not-yet-broadcast episode does not belong in this thread. If it’s from one of the episodes leaked online it’s flat out forbidden – that’s stated on the home page.
If it’s from location photos, cast information or a mate on the production team, it’s a spoiler and belongs in the Spoiler thread, only. Official previews and official clips live in the Trailers blog.
Rick, if you’ve worked out this theory from examining stills from the already broadcast episodes using high magnification, fine. That’s what we do. If you’ve worked it out using any information at all from an episode not yet broadcast, you shouldn’t be here. You should be in the Spoiler thread.
Theories that do not use information from not-yet-broadcast episodes don’t count as spoilers and don’t need a warning. Even if you have spotted Strax waving at the camera (during an already broadcast episode) in the reflection on a dessert spoon. 😀
19 September 2014 at 02:25 #32034@nick1235 – it should have gone in the trailers section. Some people don’t like trailers or coming soons, so we have a separate area for them.
@phaseshift, @craig, @jimthefish, @fatmaninabox – if any of you can tear yourselves away from the telly (or are you at results parties?), could you move it?
Ta.18 September 2014 at 12:52 #32021@thommck – I don’t think ‘risque’ – but I do think that there may be some plot points coming up where the Beeb would prefer parents of smaller children to have advance knowledge.
@blenkinsopthebrave – nice to have you back. At least it was the right cellar! 😉
18 September 2014 at 11:12 #32015@pedant – England does the Drunk Giraffe. 😉
17 September 2014 at 22:20 #31995Hmmm… do you not like this game we’re playing?
Anyway, you appear to make three assumptions. One is that the writers/production team never plan things out in detail – and we know from interviews that they do plan the more complex stuff out. For example, River Song’s arc took up an entire whiteboard in the production office. They have meetings. They have more meetings. They have a bloody great open plan office where they can talk to each other. 😉
Secondly, you’re assuming that the writers don’t enjoy these games themselves. That the fans are fans and the writers are writers, and ne’er the twain shall meet. But the writers may be professionals, but many of them are also fans. They did enjoy these games – and they’ve probably seen, say, Mawdryn Undead a time or three.
I’m told Mr Moffat’s party piece is to identify scenes from BG Who. Doctor, Story, Episode and scene. From, very often, one still. Neil Gaiman has said a couple of times that – compared to other stuff he does – Who simply isn’t that well paid. Peter Capaldi left a perfectly good job to come and be the Doctor.
Thirdly, you’re assuming that production teams aren’t creative and aren’t used to contributing to an idea or theme. Once you see the arc in totality, its plot requirement in the individual stories can often be boiled down to a sentence or two – then expanded upon by the writer. If the production team know the arc (and they do) they can add visual details. Similarly for sound, costume etc.
If, for example, the production team and commissioned writers know that the Doctor is being spied on, visual effects might suggest lots of close ups of eyes. Costume might bring in a dress for Jenna Coleman one ep. that looks like it’s covered in eyes. Props and sets might include lots of mirrors. Sound would plan for subliminally disturbing noises. The seemingly impossible number of hours needed to keep the plates spinning are split between the different teams.
These are professionals: that doesn’t mean they can’t enjoy their work. 🙂
16 September 2014 at 23:47 #31931but, i thought all the calculations were done by the sonic, in the 400 years between the war doctor and eleven?
That’s what the Smith Doctor thought. But he also said the Time Lords would be trapped in a single moment (according to Steven Moffat, via The Doctor(s)). Yet in Time of The Doctor (written by one S. Moffat), the Time Lords can pretty clearly do stuff – which implies they’re not.
Which implies he may have got his calculations slightly wrong. Never mind; he’s got a time machine and he is a Time Lord. He can figure it out, given a blackboard and a lot of chalk. 😉
16 September 2014 at 23:27 #31927@oblique – Karen Gillan remarked that whenever she thought Steven Moffat had put in a line just for fun, it turned out to be a plot point three or four episodes later. 😉
Yes, there’s sometimes padding. However experienced a scriptwriter is, you’re never quite sure that time on the page will equate to time on the screen. It’s more usual to go over and need to cut something, but sometimes it happens that the script runs under. That’s usually when you get the exciting exiting scene of people arguing about leaving the TARDIS. 🙂 In desperation, one actor may exit first in a huff and then the remaining two argue about the first one having left. 😀
Alternatively, you get the alien warrior race that equip their soldiers with the ability to remotely operate old typewriters. I think Moffat’s still slightly embarrassed about that scene – but between only having two actors allowed to speak and no props available except the typewriter, there really wasn’t much he could do. 😈
16 September 2014 at 14:06 #31878at what point in twelve’s timeline will he go off to help remove the previously doomed gallifrey from the universe, as portrayed in ‘the day of the doctor?’
When he’s finished the calculations on the chalk-board, of course. 😉
16 September 2014 at 12:28 #31874@pedant – you’re missing the point. It’s the absence of the shirt. The jumper clearly signifies that this is a ‘Dark Doctor’ with glints of light shining through.
He is the darkness without which we can’t see the stars.
16 September 2014 at 11:53 #31872@pedant – ah, but we’re promptly sucked into ‘bizarre relationships’ by meeting Orson. 😉
16 September 2014 at 11:23 #31867Why an orphange?
It makes it immediately clear that he’s in foster care, which means the one-liner about ‘family stuff’ is pretty certain to be some kind of plot point. Or a set-up for Danny later producing a son or daughter to show that Clara never was Orson’s great-grandmother. Courtney? Could be, because the headteacher introduces Danny to Clara as if he’s a new teacher, but talks about him as if he’s known him for years.
The point that he’s in foster-care suggests that – say – a villain who can retrieve people from death might have a very powerful hold over Danny. Lots of references to Mawdryn Undead in Danny’s background and this episode. In Mawdryn Undead a future companion is offered something he wants badly in exchange for killing the Doctor. If Danny’s an orphan, the thing he wants badly is something Missy can give. In that case the ‘family stuff’ is connected to Missy (and that’s why we don’t have an overt reference to the ‘Promised Land’ arc).
A less dramatic reason for making it obvious Danny was in foster-care would be to give all those fostered children watching a positive role model. Danny had a bad start, ended up a caring and responsible soldier (a career which is often very attractive to fostered kids as it gives them both order and a substitute family) and is now a teacher. Even if Danny is doing a Turlough that would still hold, providing he’s going to end up on the good side.
16 September 2014 at 10:58 #31865Arrgh! I’m thick! Thick, thick, thick!
Or possibly there was a perception filter operating. I wouldn’t put it past Moffat. 🙂
We’re happily saying ‘oh, yeah, Dan the Soldier Man is a family heirloom. That’s why Orson gave it to Clara’. BUT, the last person you’d give a family heirloom to is the person who’s given/left it to you in the first place!
For one thing, that would mean that there would be two versions of Dan the Soldier Man in the same place and time, which would lead to either a minor electrical discharge (like the Sonic in Big Bang) or outright disaster (Mawdryn Undead).
Orson, I’d say, knows more than he’s letting on. He’s recognised Clara; not as his ancestor, but as the person he has to give Dan the Soldier Man to. The cheap and broken little toy, after all, has been placed in a trophy case as if it’s extremely precious and important. And if it’s the toy that helped make the Doctor, then that’s exactly what it is. Will be. (Why doesn’t English have decent tenses for time travel?)
The reason his manner changes, btw, might well be like the way River’s attitude to Donna changes when she learns Donna’s name. That was another Moffat script; like River, Orson is from the future and knows what will happen to Clara.
16 September 2014 at 10:47 #31864@everyone – I’d agree with all concerned that hot political potatoes like this one are probably best kept elsewhere.
There are loads of places to argue about politics, but very few places where people can have a civil discussion about Doctor Who. 😉
16 September 2014 at 01:04 #31838@scaryb – at first I just thought Courtney was a nice nod in the direction of the late Nicholas Courtney. But all things considered: Courtney, an ex-soldier who became a maths teacher after leaving the army, I’m beginning to wonder.
Another nod to the Brigadier/Nick Courtney – this episode features the actor for the ex-soldier who became a maths teacher playing an older character and a younger character from different time zones – and they meet each other. However, they can’t touch – because ‘Orson’ is sealed inside his spacesuit.
So if ‘Orson’ is a descendent, why did the Doctor have him enter the restaurant sealed inside a spacesuit? Or is it merely a Moffaty nod to the ‘Grandparent Paradox’ – Orson needed to make minimal contact in case he stopped his great-grandparents getting together?
And it was weird that no one noticed the spaceman – Clara even lampshades it by calling it ‘surreal’.
15 September 2014 at 13:57 #31782No, don’t agree.
Well, of course not. You’re a Scottish Nationalist. Don’t get me wrong; the White Paper proposal has very effectively blindsided the BBC – it’s a very neat bit of political maneuvering.
And I’ve no doubt they could have had an input into the White Paper itself if they’d been remotely inclined.
They are allowed to promote a Bill in either Parliament to protect their own interests. They are allowed to enter into Framework Agreements with the relevant governments. However, I’m really not sure that they’re allowed to enter into negotiations with one or other side in an ongoing referendum. Any lawyers who could comment?
The Sunday Herald’s exposure of the timing of the RBS emails
Jim, you might be interested in this blog entry by Robert Peston, on the BBC‘s news site. Notice the date of the blog.
15 September 2014 at 02:59 #31734But I’d also say that you pretty comprehensively reinforce the argument I was making above — that the Beeb have a lot to lose by an independent Scotland and that they very much have a vested interest in the debate and therefore cannot be trusted in terms of journalistic impartiality.
Go back to the beginning: who gave the BBC a lot to lose?
The authors of the Scottish White Paper, by making an offer that ten minutes examination of the books will show quite massively undervalues the value of the programming the non-Scottish bits of the BBC provide to Scotland. After all the deductions for expenditure no longer needed, and additions for programming to be provided, the offer works out at about 20 to 25% under the current licence fee.
Which licence fee, the White Paper says, the new Scottish government will continue to collect at the same amount as before.
Who wrote the White Paper? That would be the people with a vested interest in a ‘Yes’ vote. It’s terribly convenient to be able to claim that BBC News has a ‘vested interest’ and so can’t possibly be ‘impartial’.
It’s called ‘dirty politics’. You write the rules so that someone will have an obvious reason to oppose you – and then claim they have a ‘vested interest’ and so ‘aren’t impartial’. Of course they have a ‘vested interest’; the ‘vested interest’ was created quite deliberately – by the authors of the White Paper, in this case, because they were the ones who had the power to write the rules.
The amazing thing is that so many of the BBC’s reporters are managing to grit their teeth and try and remain impartial.
14 September 2014 at 21:41 #31702@jimthefish – hang onto your hat; I’m about to get anoraky.
I have a sneaking feeling that the Beeb spends rather more on Scotland than £160 million and that the figure quoted is for programming, not maintaining infrastructure. The figure I think the Scottish government has quoted is £175 million, which sounds about right. But anyway, let’s go with £320 million collected, and £160 million spent. Scotland pays £160 million towards national programming.
Going by an 8.2% share of population, that means national programming should cost about £1951 million. However, the BBC’s annual budget (including other countries like Wales and NI as well as English regional programming) comes to £3157.6 million (not including the ‘spent on Scotland’). Either the Beeb is spending one heck of a lot on other regional programming – or Scotland is not actually paying a population based share of the national budget. The Scottish licence fees have been disproportionately directed towards Scottish based programming.
From the point of view of the White Paper, the offer to the BBC is that the new Scottish government should take over the assets and staff of BBC Scotland, supply the BBC with the current level of programming (up to the value of £80 million, but it’s often lower), and receive national programming in exchange for the programming they supply.
So, in exchange for getting rid of £175 million expenditure and receiving £60 to 80 million in commissioned programming, the BBC is expected to swallow a loss in revenue of at least £65 million. That’s not counting the pro-rata share in BBC Worldwide which will go to the newly independent Scotland.
One hopes this proposal is merely the initial offer, because if the White Paper is actually a serious proposition the BBC’s response is likely to be two words.
One will start with ‘F’ and the other with ‘O’. 😉
14 September 2014 at 21:36 #31701Apologies to the rest of the UK, but if 1 partner decides they want to talk about leaving a partnership then they shouldn’t be forced to stay by the other 3 partners.
But you’re not talking about it to the other 3 partners. You’re talking about it to yourselves. It’s like some kind of rewatch of the dungeon scene in Day of the Doctor. [Trying to keep it a bit light].
The reason this situation came about was because, to be honest, the politicos thought there wasn’t a cat in hell’s chance that Scotland would actually vote ‘Yes’. So, instead of this being a nationwide debate about ‘Do we want a United Kingdom’, it ended up as a Scottish vote on leaving.
Now, the normal response to one partner deciding to leave when the other partners want them to stay is shock, followed by anger. Whatever way you look at it, that’s not a good situation for a new country to be in – their closest neighbours pretty pissed off. Furthermore, if the vote does go down to the wire, half the population of Scotland is likely to be pretty pissed off as well. Which half depending on who wins. Also not good.
Much of this would probably have been avoided if the debate and the voting had been nationwide. We would be talking about a possible amicable divorce, instead of ‘does Scotland want to walk out’. It’s a different atmosphere.
On a brighter note, I’m sure Cameron, Miliband and Clegg are all … needing to go to the loo a lot. If the vote is ‘Yes’, their careers are finished.
14 September 2014 at 16:20 #31647@craig – as I’ve pointed out a couple of times on Guardian threads, the current SNP offer for the BBC appears to be effectively asking the rBBC to pay Scotland to take their programmes.
At least, when I do the maths on the calculator, that’s very much what it looks like. It will be a bit tricky for the BBC to remain unbiased when they look at the current suggestion – and realise they’re the turkey heading for Christmas.
My opinion – the great and the good decided that I and millions like me I don’t have a vote on this: yet our nationality could be redefined. Living in a democracy? Are we hell! 🙁
14 September 2014 at 13:44 #31633@skywalkerwho – I think the reason the Daleks can’t just leap into Gallifrey’s past is that they’ve never been inside the time-line of a Time Lord. Clara has. Clara can go anywhere in the Doctor’s time-line up to the date specified in The Name of The Doctor (that is, his original future of dying at Trenzalore).
It’s interesting; the implication we’re meant to pick up is that the TARDIS took them to young Rupert Pink because Clara got distracted by thinking of Danny. But when Clara’s left the TARDIS, is outside the TARDIS, the TARDIS takes the Doctor to Orson Pink. And we’re given a possible explanation; Orson is connected to Clara because he’s her descendent.
But the actual connection is between Danny Pink, his possible-descendent Orson, and the Doctor. Clara is the messenger who takes the soldier brave enough to not carry a gun back to the young Doctor.
Moffat likes to take television practices and use them as something real-world. Now, we’re all presuming Orson is a descendent because he’s got a different name to Rupert/Danny. And the TV practice of using the same actor to play a grandparent/grandchild encourages that.
But what if he’s not Danny’s grandchild? What if, like Clara, he’s a Claricle – a Danicle, as I think I’ve said before. Consider: Clara is either Clara Oswald, Miss Montague or Oswin Oswald (from her nickname). Danny Pink is Rupert Pink, Danny Pink – and Orson Pink? Kai Blue?
Clara always has a mother – does Danny always have a sister? Journey Blue seemed to only have an uncle. No parents. Young Rupert’s in a Children’s Home. No parents. Yet he has ‘family stuff’.
The argument against the Danicle idea is that the soldier is a family heirloom.
Oh, and one odd point, given the religious imagery in Robots of Sherwood. The modern Doctor in the armed forces is not a combatant, but does carry a gun to protect themselves and their patients. The one soldier who’s generally ‘brave enough to not carry a gun’ is the chaplain.
So which soldier is our Doctor? Is he the medic – or is he the priest? Does he make people better physically? Or is his job to make people better? 😉
14 September 2014 at 12:53 #31628@pedant – what do we know about Missy’s Heaven?
You have to die to go there. Die by sacrificing yourself for others, at the instigation of the Doctor. Yeah – I think Clara-from-Blackpool, like all the Claricles, is destined for a short life. She’ll die trying to save the Doctor. Or to save something for the Doctor.
However, merely being dead doesn’t suggest Clara won’t be taking any further part in events. Rory died more times than Kenny, and River was living a busy and active post-death life. Donna got saved.
Moffat has form on this sort of stuff. 😉
@cathannabel – yes, the adult couple didn’t really have the feel of ‘parents’, and the references to the other boys hints that this is a pre-Academy prep school. The Tennant Doctor talks about young Time Lords being sent to the Academy at, eight, was it? Young, anyway.
And the option of ‘Academy or Army’ has a bit of an upper-class feel about it. It would also explain why the Doctor has always had this rather low opinion of the military – in his world, joining the army was the option for those who’d failed to become Time Lords. Soldiers were the dimbos. 🙂
14 September 2014 at 00:58 #31581@pedant and @fatmaninabox – if you watch the documentary, they say quite definitively who the child is.
14 September 2014 at 00:22 #31579@fatmaninabox – okay. Now explain how Clara has a link to the Master’s time line, and we’re all set! 😀
I agree the barn in Day of the Doctor doesn’t have an upper level. It also has ivy growing inside it, rather a lot of holes, and is in the middle of a desert (which is, frankly, an odd place to put a barn full of rusty farming gear).
All of this, however, could be explained by ‘Don’t you know there’s a Time War on?’ 😉
Clara may be jumping to conclusions – but the conclusion that the Hurt Doctor instinctively went back to the place where he used to hide when he wanted to hide what he was doing from everyone is thematically rather nice.
14 September 2014 at 00:04 #31577we don’t know the little boy in the barn was The Doctor.
No, we don’t. There’s already some speculation on the Graun that it could be a small Master. However:
- the little boy is a lonely little boy. We know the Doctor was a lonely little boy.
- the little boy is described as ‘not going to get into the Academy’ and ‘he’ll never be a Time Lord.’ We know the Doctor scraped through the Academy, passing on his second attempt.
- the barn is connected with an important point in the Doctor’s life.
- Clara has been inside the Doctor’s time-line, so it’s a reasonable guess that she may still have a psychic link to the Doctor’s time-line.
Basically, all the clues point to it being the Doctor-as-a-little boy. We’ve seen the Master as a child, we’ve seen the Doctor’s cot, now we see the Doctor as a child.
13 September 2014 at 23:34 #31573Everyone – could we leave off the acronyms, please? Pretty please? Especially since half of them start with T. It can’t take you half as long to type Satan Pit as it takes me to work out TSP is ‘Satan Pit’ and not a popular brand of disinfectant. Or possibly a bank. Time Sensory Perception? 🙂
Could be Sanctuary Base was researching into time travel, amongst other things. If you watch the Brian Cox talk that’s in the 50th Anniversary box set, he discusses the applicability to time travel of the event horizon of a black hole. Orson would be travelling in the right direction (the future) to use the event horizon method.
13 September 2014 at 22:27 #31566Hmmm… I think we’re being thrown for a loop on the idea that Orson is Clara’s grandson or great-grandson. The fact that they used Samuel Anderson makes it obvious he’s Danny’s grandson/great grandson.
Now consider: we meet young Rupert in a Children’s Home. In Gloucester. Yet later on, in London, he talks about ‘family stuff’. He’s in his early thirties – ‘family stuff’ could easily refer to a son or daughter he doesn’t want to mention on a first date.
Time travel runs in the family? The plastic soldier brave enough to not carry a gun is a family heirloom? I dunno – maybe we’re looking at the wrong candidate for child and grandchild. The ‘family heirloom’, after all, is given to the Doctor.
And Colonel Orson Pink says ‘grandparent’ and then corrects it to ‘great-grandparent’. As if the stories were told by his grandparent, but his great-grandparent was the time traveller. Not just along for the ride; his great-grandparent was a time traveller.
Final comment: Rupert is named after Clara. Clara is Latin for ‘Clear, Bright, Famous’. Rupert is German for – Bright, Famous, Shining.
13 September 2014 at 21:06 #31552Was it just me, or did the Doctor wake up from a dream of Doctor Who Legacy? ‘The Sontarans are destroying the time line!’
13 September 2014 at 20:40 #31538@mattie – you’ll never know, mattie. That’s the point. You’ll never know. 😉
-
AuthorPosts
