[SuzanneMS @replies]

@purofiolion Why would I need a drink? Am I not allowed to hate the Daleks? Is it a requirement of this forum that one love the Daleks?

Why so snarky and patronizing?

[SuzanneMS @replies]

@jphamlore @bluesqueakpip I agree — Victorian governess. I see a mad, evil Mary Poppins. And, no, there’s absolutely no sense whatsoever that Missy has any idea of becoming Mum. She just likes being the one in charge. In addition to Clara as a governess, we had Matron Cofelia in Partners in Crime and, of course, the ice governess in The Snowmen.

I think this is all a bit of a stretch :

Clara is so like the Doctor, she can actually be the Doctor when she has to be (Flatline).

So is Donna Noble. Far more than Clara. Donna really IS the DoctorDonna. And Clara is only pretending to be the Doctor to people who do not know the Doctor. It’s called “acting” — and most of us can do it.

The Doctor describes Clara (mistakenly, because Missy set up the restaurant meeting) in Deep Breath as an ‘egomaniac needy game player sort of person.’ Which means that, without realising, the Doctor’s just described Clara as being very like Missy.

And Clara thought the Doctor was talking about himself. I think this is giving far too much weight to what was meant to be comic relief.

Throughout Series 8, we see that Clara is quite capable of lying to and manipulating the people she most loves

Aren’t we all? How does this establish that Clara is related to the Doctor anymore than she is related to Missy or Queen Elizabeth or Alison Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart?

She’s also capable of going damn near insane with grief; she’d willingly kill herself and the Doctor to punish him for not bringing Danny back.

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.

In Death in Heaven, Missy treats Clara very much the way she treats the Doctor; dumps her in a dangerous situation and leaves her to get out of it by herself.

S/he treats everyone that way, not just Clara. It says far more about Missy than it does Clara.

In Listen, the TARDIS takes Clara to the children’s home where Danny is staying. The Doctor, who has investigated her entire life, appears perfectly happy that a little baby Clara might be in the children’s home and has just forgotten about it.

The Doctor has not investigated her entire life; the Tardis started to, but then it got it wrong. It went off onto Danny’s timeline. This Doctor is more deliberately and visibly alien; he’s more deliberately and visibly arrogant and dismissive of humans as merely intelligent apes. He is more than willing to accept that Clara has forgotten about it because, well, she’s human and they aren’t the brightest crayons in the box.

We never did see Clara’s mum in hospital just having given birth. We first saw Clara at home, a few months old. It’s compatible with adoption.

We also never see the wedding between Clara’s mum and dad. Does that mean it didn’t happen?

In Night Terrors, we also see that adoptive parents can forget that they are adoptive parents.

In one specific and particular circumstance and only because the Tenza was making them forget. We have no reason to believe that Clara is a Tenza — or any other alien.

If you want to convince me that she’s the Doctor’s daughter, let’s start with two hearts.

And for a nice, big plot hole — how did Clara get the leaf back? She gave it to the Old God in Rings of Akhaten.

[SuzanneMS @replies]

I hate Daleks. I really, really hate Daleks. I have always hated Daleks. I also hate the Cybermen and I hate the Borg. I hate all “invincible” enemies. They are boring. There are only two possible outcomes — either they die or the heroes die. And as the heroes can’t die, it’s all just waiting until the Daleks to die.

Is the Doctor a “good Dalek” or a “Dalek who is good?” Don’t know — don’t care. Can we see some new villains, please?

I admit to not having read all 337 postings, but the ones I did read — am I the only one who recognized the “Star Wars” reference? The garbage compacter scene?

Not commenting on the speculations about Missy, Danny, Journey, etc., as I’ve watched the entire series at this point.

[SuzanneMS @replies]

@purofilion @bluesqueakpip @jphamlore @lisa @IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan @missy

Love it! Take a day off to do that thing called “work,” and look what is waiting for me!

Just to be clear — this is all speculation (the home page does say that this is the place for it) and I realize that the writers, etc., can and will do whatever they like.  But to just leave it at that is no fun, is it?

I do think there is a difference between trying to argue that something that was shown “on the stage” really didn’t happen or was reversed “off the stage,” and suggesting that something that was not shown “on the stage” might have happened “off the stage.” We know that the Doctor has only ever been male — we know all of his generations. We do not know this about the Master. We do not know that we have seen all of his generations, and in fact, we know that we have not, unless we are going to disregard the original series. The Master, in the original, was already on his umpteenth regeneration.

We also know that our ideas about sexuality are restricted by our human view of it. We are coming around to the idea that it is not solely an issue of biology/anatomy, but we still tend to see it as relatively fixed and stable. We see bisexuals as always bisexual, homosexuals as always homosexual, heterosexual as always heterosexual. Transgender people say that they have always felt like the other sex -not that they felt like their biological sex until a certain point.

For most of us, our experience makes it very difficult to imagine a kind of free-floating sexuality. I suppose that bi-sexual comes closest, but even that term insists that there are only two sexes.

And certainly most viewers would react very badly to a Doctor Who is not straight — hence, the Master becomes Missy and the Doctor is confounded.

So, now, we and the writers can really play around with the question of sexuality for a species that can and does change gender — and knows it. Do all change gender? If not, why not? What determines if and when? Certainly can make for some interesting storytelling!

IIRC, the Jacobi Master did not know who he was when he referred to being shot by a woman. It’s 6:38 in the morning and my husband would not be pleased if I were to turn on Netflix to refresh my memory! Besides, a little thing like that never stopped the writers before and no one is claiming that the Master is a stable personality!

Missy says that the Doctor is her boyfriend and “loves me so much” to the android, not the Doctor. Does she say this to Clara? Looks like I’ll have to watch it again — so sad! Of course, it is all part of one of the themes of this episode, which is exploring different kinds of love and clarifying relationships.

Oh, yes, she’s the ultimate psycho-stalker — through time and space. And it is entirely possible that, when she found herself a woman, she re-cast their relationship in those terms. That certainly is the most parsimonious explanation. Or that she regenerated as a woman specifically because she wanted to interact with the Doctor as a female. It is a new twist on their relationship, which had become rather formulaic.

Not so sure about Missy being Eve. Kind of dangerous to have a psycho as the mother of a new generation of Time Lords. And the Doctor clearly is not interested. Besides, if all we want is a new race of Time Lords, the Doctor can do that using only his DNA — remember?

[SuzanneMS @replies]

Well, we do know that River Song has always been female — we’ve seen each of her regenerations. We have not seen all of the Master’s, so it is incorrect to claim that the Master has always been male.

The Doctor is also trying to desperately figure out who he is. Besides, doesn’t he — don’t we — all believe that the Master is dead and gone?

If the writers, et al., are not trying to suggest that the Master has been a female before, what is the meaning of her calling the Doctor “My boyfriend?” She says this to the android, so unless it’s meant entirely for the audience, it can’t be a reference to 11 and Clara.

Another possibility, of course, is that the Master has always had, shall we say, certain feelings for the Doctor and engineered this regeneration in order to attract the Doctor? That, of course, assumes that the Doctor is straight.

So far, the Doctor’s companions have been female; the only men along for the ride have been attached to the female companion (I think — can’t remember about Jamie). So, he’s at least performing “straight.”

What I was questioning is whether attraction is determined by gender or if it is something that is a permanent aspect of the . . . soul? personality? Does it change with regeneration so that the Time Lord is always cisgendered? Or is it fixed?

It is also entirely possible that the Doctor is omnisexual, that all Time Lords are.

And I think Capaldi is sexy as hell — and funny — and refreshingly free of cloying sentiment. Practical, pragmatic, and something else that starts with p.

Finally an adult in charge of the Tardis again. Nice of them to remember us old fans who have stuck with it for the past 50 years.

And can someone tell me how to do that @reply thing?

[SuzanneMS @replies]

Probably ought to move this discussion to the last episode, but, oh well.

Not watching the box set. Watching it streaming on Amazon. I’ve seen them all once. Now going back through. I’ll pay more attention this time to how the Doctor reacts to Missy.

Does the Doctor know every one of the Master’s regenerations? We certainly don’t. We only see the Master when he interacts with the Doctor. Originally, the Master had gone beyond his 13 regenerations and was rather hideously decomposing, while desperately seeking means to reverse that process. Obviously they just ignore that in the new series.

This goes beyond transgender. It gets right to the heart of gender fluidity and the social construction of gender. What does gender mean to a species that can change the structure and shape of its body completely and entirely without medical intervention?  To a truly androgynous species? Ursula K. LeGuin asked these questions in 1969, in “The Left Hand of Darkness.” Dr. Who is just now catching up.

It also raises the question of the relationship between the Doctor and the Master — in particular, the Master’s feelings toward the Doctor. It also should make us wonder whether the Doctor, who so far has been presented as a straight male, would be attracted to men if he were a woman, or would he continue to be attracted to women?

They deal with the “face” in this first episode – the Doctor asks himself, “Why did I choose this face?” and unlike previous regenerations, he initially insists that it is not his face in the mirror, but that it belongs to someone else.

[SuzanneMS @replies]

Finally convinced myself to fork over the money to Amazon for season 8. LOVING Capaldi. He is so reminiscent of many Classic Doctors, which is when I started watching. Took a bit to get used to the new music, but I am really liking the way that it plays up the idea of a clock chiming.

Don’t know if anyone has mentioned this — I gave up reading the 651 comments somewhere around 200 — but Capaldi also appears in “Torchwood” as John Frobisher in the “Children of Earth” series in 2009, well after the Dr. Who connection was made.

Those asking whether the Doctor pushed the android or the android jumped — no way to tell. Even logic won’t help. The android says that his basic programming will not allow him to self-destruct; the doctor says that his won’t allow him to murder, then later says that “One of us is lying about his basic programming.” Well, if the android is lying, that means that he can self-destruct and the doctor cannot commit murder — so the android jumped. If the doctor is lying, it means he can commit murder and the android cannot self-destruct — so the doctor killed him.

I lean toward the latter. We know the doctor can kill — and that he has done it before by essentially pushing someone off the edge. Just ask the Sycorax leader.

Now that we all know who Missy is — and we do all know, right? If not, sorry.  I’d just ask what makes you think that this is the first time that this particular Time Lord has been a woman.

[SuzanneMS @replies]

Actually, I said that we pretty much all like and dislike the same things (about this episode) — and your comment just supports that. I think we all like — even love — seeing Jackie at home and how she’s affected by never knowing exactly where Rose is or when she’ll see her again (if ever). I think this is the first time that any writer has ever considered the people whom the companions leave behind.

Yep, Elton is a great character. So is Ursula. So are the other members of LINDA.  I already said that they had a winning idea with LINDA. Having been in more than one sci-fi/fantasy fan club in my day, they were spot on with the character types and also the arc of a group such as that. I met my husband via a fan site — although it was for a television Western, not sci-fi show.

And none of us really care for the Absorbaloff. The reason I dislike it is the ending; it’s out of balance with the beginning. It doesn’t fit with the beginning and its lighthearted humor. It should have had a happy ending.
Even if none of that were true, why would I cut you to shreds for having a different opinion?

[SuzanneMS @replies]

So, I found this discussion forum solely so that I could express how much I really dislike this episode. Feels pretty good to find out that I am not the only one, and that we pretty much all like and dislike the same things. They had a winning idea with LINDA, then spoiled it with a nonsensical monster story. It’s obvious they didn’t know where to go with it, and didn’t want to go with the obvious, which was that the members of LINDA pair off and actually get a life.

In addition to everything mentioned above, there’s the ridiculousness of the Absorbaloff. How would such a creature even evolve? It absorbs every living creature it touches — so how is there more than one of them? And why? Other aliens are part of a species and culture; they have a backstory and purpose as a species. This thing is a one-off. It exists solely to give the writers an easy way out. That’s why the doctor doesn’t even pretend to give it a chance.

[Author]

Posts