Adding a child complicates it a whole lot, and it's less that I object on a logistical level as that it offends me aesthetically . . .
Yes, exactly, and...there's a reason why the story doesn't let the Doctor run off with Amelia when she's still 7. I'd actually kind of love that, but it's a dangerous, stupid, madcap idea - how long could you ignore the sheer irresponsibility of it?
River (Abigail and the space shark)
LOLZ. But yes - interesting analysis and one that might well prove true. I certainly think that in the end, everything has to come down to intellect + romance > brute force + cynicism, right? I mean, Moffat's Who, on a basic level, has never done anything else. If it did, I might cry.
Moff did end The Eleventh Hour with a big, neon-lit hint about the Silence, and by the end of the season we still hadn't really addressed it and it's become the main story of this season instead, so I could see him doing the same with the Time Baby--his stories tend to have that sort of symmetry and structural neatness to them.
Ooh, now there's a parallel I had completely missed. I think because the lantern he hung on the Silence during The Eleventh Hour was so much smaller. Whereas in terms of intrigue and plot-information, the last shot of the girl was more like the mysterious Silence blowing up the tardis in the first place rather than simply a mysterious, metaphorical name-drop. But in terms of the story's shape you could very well be right. We would still need it to move forward - we'd need another chunk of infomration about that kid - and preferably who she is and why she can regenerate! - before the end of the season, but her story might spill over into next year. (In that way does she also parallel River?)
*shudder* That would be dark, dark, dark. But not entirely implausible, I think? I mean, whatever the explanation, we've already got a story going on in which either aliens have built/made a child or stolen one away from its parents and she's wandering the streets dying. We're already in very dark territory.
Yes, exactly. Though I think I managed to be unhelpfully vague and not quite correctly communicate part of what I meant when I suggested the Doctor take on the Jekyll persona in this situation (because I agree that both of them have some of that going on). I do remember talking you to about the leaked DVD blurbs and what they implied about River's identity being a good thing rather than the horrible thing that had previously been implied, but that's not entirely what I meant by suggesting that she'd stop the Doctor from going all "love is a psychopath". Well it is, but not necessarily as something he'd view positively?
Again, with no expectation that this is correct, simply riffing on the issues you raised here -
What if River stops him from saving his own child? Could he ever forgive that, no matter her reasons?
I mean, obviously, yes, and obviously the kid wouldn't die, and obviously we'd have to sort of have sympathy for everyone, and you get what I'm saying. And again, I've no clue how it all works out with timelines and characters and stuff, and it's dark. But on the motivations of it only, there's something horribly compelling about the Doctor being willing to commit an atrocity to save his child, and River being willing to kill a good man and stop the Doctor doing that/put her own child in danger, in order to stop something worse: the Timelord Victorious.
Which...I'm not saying that I think they should go that way, or that they're likely to, or that I can understand exactly how that would work at Saturday teatime in a show watched by 9 year olds, but as you say - the missing component is children, and the tone of the series is nightmarish and fully of betrayal, and I really think we're being geared up for a moment where River is Judas. (Who, according to some theories, did so at Jesus' request).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 17 May 2011 12:38 pm (UTC)Yes, exactly, and...there's a reason why the story doesn't let the Doctor run off with Amelia when she's still 7. I'd actually kind of love that, but it's a dangerous, stupid, madcap idea - how long could you ignore the sheer irresponsibility of it?
River (Abigail and the space shark)
LOLZ. But yes - interesting analysis and one that might well prove true. I certainly think that in the end, everything has to come down to intellect + romance > brute force + cynicism, right? I mean, Moffat's Who, on a basic level, has never done anything else. If it did, I might cry.
Moff did end The Eleventh Hour with a big, neon-lit hint about the Silence, and by the end of the season we still hadn't really addressed it and it's become the main story of this season instead, so I could see him doing the same with the Time Baby--his stories tend to have that sort of symmetry and structural neatness to them.
Ooh, now there's a parallel I had completely missed. I think because the lantern he hung on the Silence during The Eleventh Hour was so much smaller. Whereas in terms of intrigue and plot-information, the last shot of the girl was more like the mysterious Silence blowing up the tardis in the first place rather than simply a mysterious, metaphorical name-drop. But in terms of the story's shape you could very well be right. We would still need it to move forward - we'd need another chunk of infomration about that kid - and preferably who she is and why she can regenerate! - before the end of the season, but her story might spill over into next year. (In that way does she also parallel River?)
*shudder* That would be dark, dark, dark. But not entirely implausible, I think? I mean, whatever the explanation, we've already got a story going on in which either aliens have built/made a child or stolen one away from its parents and she's wandering the streets dying. We're already in very dark territory.
Yes, exactly. Though I think I managed to be unhelpfully vague and not quite correctly communicate part of what I meant when I suggested the Doctor take on the Jekyll persona in this situation (because I agree that both of them have some of that going on). I do remember talking you to about the leaked DVD blurbs and what they implied about River's identity being a good thing rather than the horrible thing that had previously been implied, but that's not entirely what I meant by suggesting that she'd stop the Doctor from going all "love is a psychopath". Well it is, but not necessarily as something he'd view positively?
Again, with no expectation that this is correct, simply riffing on the issues you raised here -
What if River stops him from saving his own child? Could he ever forgive that, no matter her reasons?
I mean, obviously, yes, and obviously the kid wouldn't die, and obviously we'd have to sort of have sympathy for everyone, and you get what I'm saying. And again, I've no clue how it all works out with timelines and characters and stuff, and it's dark. But on the motivations of it only, there's something horribly compelling about the Doctor being willing to commit an atrocity to save his child, and River being willing to kill a good man and stop the Doctor doing that/put her own child in danger, in order to stop something worse: the Timelord Victorious.
Which...I'm not saying that I think they should go that way, or that they're likely to, or that I can understand exactly how that would work at Saturday teatime in a show watched by 9 year olds, but as you say - the missing component is children, and the tone of the series is nightmarish and fully of betrayal, and I really think we're being geared up for a moment where River is Judas. (Who, according to some theories, did so at Jesus' request).