Doctor Who: Day of the Moon
May. 4th, 2011 02:08 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccatoriaAll right, I've been trying and failing to write this for days at this point and it's getting ridiculous. Basically because I have thoughts but I can't catch them. It's like free association of themes and tropes and plot points and something very obvious I'm sure I'm missing and a sense of very tight plotting along with madcap, freewheeling ideas. I'm at a point where I want to have, um, faith, I suppose, that this will all end as neatly and satisfyingly as it did last year, but I'm also drawing confusing conclusions about a few things. Which means it'll be all the more fantastic if Moffat does pull out that brilliant conclusion but also makes me nervous of all the things he could do instead.
I was right when I said last week's episode made me want to see this week's before I rendered judgement. It really does work so much better when you know the whole of the two-parter. The way so much of what I was curious or even worried about in season five was so much better when taken as a whole. And I love stories like that - the ones where it rewards you for reaching the end, where it clarifies its own intentions and looks better when you have all the pieces which means it can't look as good before you have them. When reveals are satisfying and not wtf inducing. When the things that worried you were intentional misdirection.
I feel in many ways I have no criticisms of which I'm confident because I don't yet know whether they are things I will ultimately want to criticise. But then what do I talk about? And I am engaged.
So.
Let's take this in chunks.
Firstly, let us start with River Fucking Song.
I confess, last week I was a little disappointed that it was not All River All The Time. Sure, her entry was stylish, but we didn't see her do that much spectacularly Riverish except for a few fantastical one-liners. But this week, right as I was starting to again be disappointed that her magnificent entry by Throwing Herself Off Of A Thing In Evening Wear (River, Not The Thing), wasn't followed up by Stuff, it happened! There was stuff! Magical, magnificent stuff! Shooting and snogging and flirting and all sorts! Basically I am easy and she got to be the big damn action hero and I love that that's her function in the show a good amount of the time that she's on it.
All the stuff about that has already been said, but I really do adore this show for unapologetically allowing having her play that role, and while they hung a lantern on the apparent age difference in the last episode with the Mrs Robinson joke, I never at all felt that they were embarrassed or uncomfortable about it. I felt more that they were gently teasing the people who were.
I would also like to point out the following interview, particularly the final minute wherein Alex Kingston is adorkably self-conscious while discussing being afraid that River comes across as some kind of cougar and how she knows she shouldn't "cross that line":
http://www.gallifreyanembassy.org/vortex/?q=node/1503
LOLZ. Oh Alex Kingston, I'm so sorry they made you cross the line and snog a 28 year old. EXCEPT HOW I'M NOT REALLY. But I kind of wish I'd seen her face when Moffat told her that she'd just have to get over it, SHIT IS ABOUT TO GET ROMANTIC.
Speaking of which, can we talk about that kiss as if we're teenage girls at a sleepover? CAN WE? Oh who are we kidding I ain't got anything to say except *flappyhands*. JUST LIKE THE DOCTOR'S. I loved that. He was so obviously not pushing her away but also not sure how to react. Because I have watched it way too many times by this point (I gave up on shame a while back), there are a couple of times where he's like, reaching for her or settling into it before catching himself and panicking a bit. And it goes on for so long. I really, REALLY want to see someone try to convince me that (a) they're not romantically involved or (b) they are somehow blood relatives, after that.
Which also goes to the fact that their romantic entanglement was never about who she was. I have to be honest, I did used to think that an emotional, if not surprising, reveal of that would be saved for the point at which he found out the secret of who she is (which I now guess must revolve at least partially around who she kills?) but I am sort of glad it wasn't because of the way it separates her importance from her romantic importance but also because from the start the thing has been, "who is she? Wife is too obvious!" as if this meant that any twist, no matter how nonsensical, would be better than a reveal we could predict, no matter how narratively consistent. This sidesteps that issue, at least on the romance front. However, it does mean that we're still left with that weight of revelation and all its attendant pressures regarding being surprising enough that it's satisfying but not weird or random enough that we're all left going bzuh?
But more on that later. Unfortunately, my thoughts are horribly out of order. It's like a Moffat timeline here. We'll be jumping around a bit.
Speaking of that, I still don't buy the reverse linearity thing. I know that more than one line from River has implied it in these episodes, and in my dream of dreams, something awesome and subversive will happen, like the finale that involves whatever crazy time rewriting/alternate timeline shenanigans it must surely involve, will shake up their romance into some crazy order instead of reverse-linear. But that aside, numerous things from previous episodes don't stack up unless (a) River meets the Doctor allll out of order not in reverse order, or (b) she's deliberately lying to him to make him think it's not in neat reverse order, in which case why?
I mean, let's start with the diaries. Neat reverse order means that their experiences are exclusive. They will never cross over. Meaning there's no need for diaries. Everything River's experienced, the Doctor has yet to experience and vice versa. Stuff like Jim the Fish and Easter Island can't have happened to both of them, and if that was a fluke of the Doctor showing up out of order like that for a brief visit, why wasn't River surprised to have a joint experience?
River may have been lying about not recognising Rory, or may have forgotten him because he was "dead" at the time - I say this largely because the big point at which we DO find out who she is is apparently this year and it's clearly in the past for the River of the Pandorica episodes, which means unless there's a cunning way in which Rory and River never meet in those episodes, or Rory spends the whole thing pretending to be a plastic centurion so unimportant River never learns his name, there might be some pretending going on. But, I still tentatively place these episodes after the Pandorica episodes (even if RIVER'S not aware of that) because of the vortex manipulator which she clearly has on most of the episode. Procuring one for every escape seems extravagant.
In addition, even if we can buy that post-Day of the Moon River has time to make her peace with the fact she'll never snog him again and decides to just enjoy the time she has left with him, I dunno, she takes too much joy in teasing him about not recognising her in the Angels episodes. Why would she say "it's so weird when you go all baby face," when, if things were in strict reverse order, she'd be well used to that by now.
I'm going to go out on a limb and ignore River's implications until I can't do otherwise. Partly because I think in this relationship first and lasts may always have a special, poignant significance, for the possibility that they are reversed, if not the fact. But also, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that River's in a sad state of mind. The death of the Doctor, as far as she knows, permanently, is going to put her in the frame of mind to be considering the ultimate end of their relationship. In addition, the memory removal of the Silence - and memory is such a powerful theme throughout the entirety of Moffat's run - ties in horribly with the way the Doctor loses memories of her, for all practical purposes at random. Her morose fixation on the day he will one day forget her, on having to be the one to remember because he cannot, on death, and, in a nonlinear relationship, whether that is a worse fate than being forgotten, is a mindset makes a certain amount of sense in the context of this adventure. It's a more complicated and sadder version of Amy and Rory's quiet look when the Doctor declares, in the finale scene, "you only live once!"
In conclusion, SHE THREW HERSELF OUT A BUILDING, with...no safety mechanism other than magic. That's some sexy, sexy trust there.
So, River. Awesome. Let's move on to the episode itself.
I was actually really impressed, on a plot and structural level with what this episode did. The Silence weren't really that terrifying in the last episode. An interesting idea maybe, but not truly horrifying. This episode really fixed that. Seeing them from Amy's perspective, suddenly the glowing in her hand, the screaming of her own voice, marks appearing all over her body - what they signify - suddenly seeing her own face in reflection, again covered. It's frightening enough I almost wish Moffat had reprised his postmodern style of handling the Angels in Blink (I will never not be sad that they moved on camera in the more recent episode; I always figured that wasn't actually what they looked like). But it wouldn't have worked longterm because we do need to interact with them more directly. Still it was an effective section of the episode for sure and really sold the idea.
Likewise I was very impressed with the resolution on two levels. Firstly I thought it was genuinely unexpected and clever, but very simple. Secondly, it's chilling.
I've seen some discussion around the interwebs about what it means that the Doctor essentially manipulated us all into the Manchurian Candidate in our own defense. I mean, I have thoughts about that: basically they fall in line with those who point out that if the Silence keep away they will be safe, and the fact that this is not the first time, not even in Nu!Who that the Doctor has done comparable things, but more than that, I'm not sure it's unjustifiable in this specific context in any event.
I appreciate the nuances of pacifism. I support the principles of nonaggression, but cannot, in good conscious, commit myself wholly to the principles of nonviolence because I don't believe it's practical or morally supportable across every situation as a blanket policy, much as I wish it were.
I want to examine two things - Ten taking down Harriet Jones and Eleven taking down the Silence. Now, I want to make it very clear that I do not think these things are comparable in terms of the threat or even the motivation, what I'm aiming at is a comparison of narrative message in terms of relative pacifism and the reasons behind an action.
Now, full disclosure, personally I think that the Tenth Doctor removed Harriet Jones from power because she asked him a question he couldn't answer (what happens when you're not here when they come back?) and he didn't like being questioned and it's, for me, one of the lowest points of the show. Meanwhile, I think that the specifics of the Silence mean that what the Doctor did was one of the few things he could do to defend us from invaders that had no qualms about murdering us and subjugating our wills even more violently than he did; what else could have been in that suggestion to save us?
But, the basic point remains that the Doctor took the choice away from us, and decided to act as parent figure. He unilaterally solved the problem. In the case of Harriet Jones, his moral imperative was pacifism, in the case of the Silence, it was delegated defence.
The difference, to me, from a narrative standpoint, is that I think I was supposed to find the Silence solution creepy and chilling and in keeping with the tone of the rest of the episode, whereas I think that I was supposed to stand with Ten in moral judgement of Harriet Jones.
I also feel that on dissection of the issues, I cannot find Ten's moral stance on Jones at all supportable given he failed to answer her simple question of what she was supposed to do if they came back and he wasn't around; he was effectively insisting she rely only on him as her Earth Defence System with no guarantee of his own reliability, whereas I find Eleven's moral stance on the Silence much more supportable, if deeply creepy. As I said before, given the nature of the threat, instant action is required or the opportunity is lost, or worse, they will implant you with a new hypnotic suggestion. Is it a fictional construct designed to offer no other option? Why yes, of course it is! But it's one I buy in the context of the story; it's consistent throughout it and the solution plays by those same rules. Unlike the Harriet Jones situation which comes across as problematic and hypocritical.
I guess my point is, I don't think slapping a "pacifist" label on something, even if it adheres to the strict definition of that label, means that it is necessarily "in character" for the Doctor. And similarly, actions that at first seem at odds with the Doctor's preference for nonviolence (because I do not think he is an active pacifist on the levels some others do), aren't necessarily "wrong" for the character or show simply because they do not conform to a basic, simple understanding of the term "pacifist" that so often gets tacked onto the Doctor because he is (wonderfully) unusual in the way he eschews violence as a solution.
However, even without that admittedly personal spin, I do think that the resolution to the Silence offers a lot more space for interpretation as to how we're supposed to feel about it. I don't think the Doctor did anything unjustifiable, but I love that it raises the question, and not in an overly simple way. I love that the resolution that I think is morally justifiable is also bone-chillingly creepy.
It's the stuff of nightmares, and I'm not sure that if season five wasn't a fairytale, season six won't be a nightmare.
All right, finally, let's talk about the TimeBaby.
This is where things get really associative and confused.
First off, let me just say that the visual of the kid regenerating was actually a lot cooler and more epic than I might have guessed; kind of like the creepiness of the astronaut visual.
That said, there are a LOT of pieces up in the air here. Thematically we're mixing up issues of memory, which was important last season too, particularly Amy's, with issues of conflicting realities - another theme from last year. Moffat's kink for parenthood rears its head too (which I think last season was mostly explored through childhood), and that's not something I inherently take issue with except when it's done badly, which it often is.
More than just Amy's Schroedinger baby, I can't help but notice Rory's on/off Roman Centurion memories. In turn perhaps this suggests a duality wherein the Doctor both is and isn't dead? The TimeBaby is said by River to be human based on the suit, but also incredibly strong (not a trait we've seen the Doctor exhibit), yet can regenerate like a Time Lord. What other properties of time does she have? Is she a Schroedinger Child? Is she real, and not, at the same time? How many timelines converge on her and who is she in any of them?
We have shit like River talking about the way a Time Lord's body is a miracle, specifically due to regeneration and how wars would be fought over a single cell. We have Amy finding a picture of herself with an infant. We have her kept captive for "many days" by the Silence talking about how she will "bring forth Silence" but her part will soon be over. Was that interrupted by the Doctor or are we missing stuff here?
How much are we missing in that three month gap that they (we) can't remember most of?
We have the child dressed as River was dressed when she first arrived in the Library episodes.
We have Moffat's penchant for timey-wimey own-timeline-crossing storylines. We have River and Amy both feeling sick when the Silence show up. We have Amy being concerned her baby will have a Time Head.
We have the confirmation of a romance between the Doctor and River which, in turn, necessitates a shocking twist for River's real identity. We have the hints that River killed the Doctor and we have the spaceman (I am still not convinced it was the child in it in 2011 but there's clearly a line drawn between the two) killing the Doctor.
Throw in the fact that the child keeps running from Team TARDIS after Amy's taken by the Silence (and as an aside here, how good was Karen Gillan in the scene where she's confronting a kid she's just found out might be hers that she tried to shoot who's in a creepy Doctor murdering astronaut suit? Very good), so she either doesn't know, or doesn't trust them? And the fact that there were a weird number of pictures of the child on that dressing table for a room only occupied by said child? More like the kind of thing the child's parent would put out?
While we're talking plot, not theme, is the reuse of the Lodger TARDIS from the last season coincidence or purposeful? The Doctor had a line about seeing an abandoned one of these at some point and I wasn't sure if that was in reference to the Lodger? If it was, given we have talk of the Silence scavenging technology, are they trying to build themselves a Time Lord to pilot their scavenged TARDIS?
On that note, why was she dying? Was the suit keeping her alive?
There's a giant clusterfuck of something going on here for sure. What intrigues and frightens me is I haven't the slightest clue how it'll be resolved but I'm having trouble seeing how to get out of this painted corner. If Moffat does it, it will be, frankly, extraordinary. But...how?
I will illustrate:
If the TimeBaby is nothing to do with either couple on Team TARDIS, then it'll be difficult to avoid that without seeming like a let down.
If it is something to do with Team TARDIS then the following two issues arise based on the most obvious potential red herrings in the plot:
1) the temptation to make her the child of one of said couples.
2) the temptation to make her a younger version of one of the women.
And how those two possibilities might interact in...weird ways.
Going with option 1), if it's Amy & Rory's baby, why does it have Time Abilities. I flat out don't believe it'd be Amy and the Doctor's child because I don't think the show would have them sleep together at this point and I don't think the show is quite creepy enough to have the Silence do weird forced IVF on her. It's a pretty scary show but kids still have to watch it and is pregnancy body horror really the way it's most likely to go? It doesn't fit Moffat's style, which I think would more likely see the Silence steal Amy's Time Baby because she had it in the first place to be stolen in a weird ontological paradoxy thing. But...could it really just be from traveling in a TARDIS? I suppose thematically it fits with sleeping next to a crack giving you magic memory, but I dunno, it seems to cheapen Time Lord abilities somehow, if you just need to gestate in a time machine to get them. Which is generally the issue if you make her any kind of Time Lord knock off - how to make it not feel like a fakeout, not feel cheap.
The alternative is to make the kid the Doctor's actual daughter which is a more thematically robust reason for her to have Time Powers, but that implies she's River's daughter too, per above with me not buying Amy/Doctor as the parents. In which case where does that leave Amy's Maybe Baby? Baby storylines are hard to pull off, and I actually trust that Moffat's a writer who can do it, but two at once? I know that was the tease with River also feeling ill (which I still believe is a red herring; if River has kids, I think she has them already), but on a practical level, we've got two potential mothers and one child here. Even setting aside my personal fear of NOES BABY PLOTLINES ARGH (because I had that about wedding plotlines too and S5 was lovely), there's a third wheel in that setup.
Going with option 2) (and I suppose the Silence provide a nice way of explaining neither Amy nor River would remember what happened to them), to be honest with you the biggest question I'd have is why? I mean, obviously Amy doesn't think she's a Time Lady, and I'm not sure how it would add anything to River to make her one either? Making either Amy or River a grown up version of the girl really only functions as a reveal of species. Amy already has a complex backstory, so I guess much as I'd favour Amy for option 1) I'd favour River for this option, but I still don't think it really works that well and requires she knows too much she's not telling unless she genuinely can't remember. It's perhaps the option that feels least immediately off course to me, but I still don't buy it.
If you start combining 1) and 2) then things get REALLY weird very quickly. We can't ever have Amy as River and the Doctor's daughter because she snogged him and this isn't Star Wars, and honestly, I'd be pretty hard to sell on River being Amy's daughter because then she's married to her own mother's best imaginary friend which is a bit creepy and her behaviour around Amy just doesn't add up that way to me.
What I'm saying is, this kid is either going to be a Time Lord or and Imitation Time Lord, and this kid is either going to be one of/related to one of Team TARDIS, or she isn't. But I think pretty much every one of those options has a heapload of problems, both narrative and more personal to me, and I can't see my way out of them?
That said, I really believe that Moffat could do it - write me a conclusion I can't see coming and/or sell me on one I did and dismissed. I'm just not 100% confident he will because television has ruined me...
AND THIS IS WHY I TRY NOT TO LET MYSELF THINK ABOUT THIS SHOW. I WRITE STUFF THAT'S THIS LONG.
But, I think, finally, I am finished.
Without even touching Creepy Dreaming Eyepatch Lady with a barge pole because clearly that's going somewhere and I have even less idea than usual.
I was right when I said last week's episode made me want to see this week's before I rendered judgement. It really does work so much better when you know the whole of the two-parter. The way so much of what I was curious or even worried about in season five was so much better when taken as a whole. And I love stories like that - the ones where it rewards you for reaching the end, where it clarifies its own intentions and looks better when you have all the pieces which means it can't look as good before you have them. When reveals are satisfying and not wtf inducing. When the things that worried you were intentional misdirection.
I feel in many ways I have no criticisms of which I'm confident because I don't yet know whether they are things I will ultimately want to criticise. But then what do I talk about? And I am engaged.
So.
Let's take this in chunks.
Firstly, let us start with River Fucking Song.
I confess, last week I was a little disappointed that it was not All River All The Time. Sure, her entry was stylish, but we didn't see her do that much spectacularly Riverish except for a few fantastical one-liners. But this week, right as I was starting to again be disappointed that her magnificent entry by Throwing Herself Off Of A Thing In Evening Wear (River, Not The Thing), wasn't followed up by Stuff, it happened! There was stuff! Magical, magnificent stuff! Shooting and snogging and flirting and all sorts! Basically I am easy and she got to be the big damn action hero and I love that that's her function in the show a good amount of the time that she's on it.
All the stuff about that has already been said, but I really do adore this show for unapologetically allowing having her play that role, and while they hung a lantern on the apparent age difference in the last episode with the Mrs Robinson joke, I never at all felt that they were embarrassed or uncomfortable about it. I felt more that they were gently teasing the people who were.
I would also like to point out the following interview, particularly the final minute wherein Alex Kingston is adorkably self-conscious while discussing being afraid that River comes across as some kind of cougar and how she knows she shouldn't "cross that line":
http://www.gallifreyanembassy.org/vortex/?q=node/1503
LOLZ. Oh Alex Kingston, I'm so sorry they made you cross the line and snog a 28 year old. EXCEPT HOW I'M NOT REALLY. But I kind of wish I'd seen her face when Moffat told her that she'd just have to get over it, SHIT IS ABOUT TO GET ROMANTIC.
Speaking of which, can we talk about that kiss as if we're teenage girls at a sleepover? CAN WE? Oh who are we kidding I ain't got anything to say except *flappyhands*. JUST LIKE THE DOCTOR'S. I loved that. He was so obviously not pushing her away but also not sure how to react. Because I have watched it way too many times by this point (I gave up on shame a while back), there are a couple of times where he's like, reaching for her or settling into it before catching himself and panicking a bit. And it goes on for so long. I really, REALLY want to see someone try to convince me that (a) they're not romantically involved or (b) they are somehow blood relatives, after that.
Which also goes to the fact that their romantic entanglement was never about who she was. I have to be honest, I did used to think that an emotional, if not surprising, reveal of that would be saved for the point at which he found out the secret of who she is (which I now guess must revolve at least partially around who she kills?) but I am sort of glad it wasn't because of the way it separates her importance from her romantic importance but also because from the start the thing has been, "who is she? Wife is too obvious!" as if this meant that any twist, no matter how nonsensical, would be better than a reveal we could predict, no matter how narratively consistent. This sidesteps that issue, at least on the romance front. However, it does mean that we're still left with that weight of revelation and all its attendant pressures regarding being surprising enough that it's satisfying but not weird or random enough that we're all left going bzuh?
But more on that later. Unfortunately, my thoughts are horribly out of order. It's like a Moffat timeline here. We'll be jumping around a bit.
Speaking of that, I still don't buy the reverse linearity thing. I know that more than one line from River has implied it in these episodes, and in my dream of dreams, something awesome and subversive will happen, like the finale that involves whatever crazy time rewriting/alternate timeline shenanigans it must surely involve, will shake up their romance into some crazy order instead of reverse-linear. But that aside, numerous things from previous episodes don't stack up unless (a) River meets the Doctor allll out of order not in reverse order, or (b) she's deliberately lying to him to make him think it's not in neat reverse order, in which case why?
I mean, let's start with the diaries. Neat reverse order means that their experiences are exclusive. They will never cross over. Meaning there's no need for diaries. Everything River's experienced, the Doctor has yet to experience and vice versa. Stuff like Jim the Fish and Easter Island can't have happened to both of them, and if that was a fluke of the Doctor showing up out of order like that for a brief visit, why wasn't River surprised to have a joint experience?
River may have been lying about not recognising Rory, or may have forgotten him because he was "dead" at the time - I say this largely because the big point at which we DO find out who she is is apparently this year and it's clearly in the past for the River of the Pandorica episodes, which means unless there's a cunning way in which Rory and River never meet in those episodes, or Rory spends the whole thing pretending to be a plastic centurion so unimportant River never learns his name, there might be some pretending going on. But, I still tentatively place these episodes after the Pandorica episodes (even if RIVER'S not aware of that) because of the vortex manipulator which she clearly has on most of the episode. Procuring one for every escape seems extravagant.
In addition, even if we can buy that post-Day of the Moon River has time to make her peace with the fact she'll never snog him again and decides to just enjoy the time she has left with him, I dunno, she takes too much joy in teasing him about not recognising her in the Angels episodes. Why would she say "it's so weird when you go all baby face," when, if things were in strict reverse order, she'd be well used to that by now.
I'm going to go out on a limb and ignore River's implications until I can't do otherwise. Partly because I think in this relationship first and lasts may always have a special, poignant significance, for the possibility that they are reversed, if not the fact. But also, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that River's in a sad state of mind. The death of the Doctor, as far as she knows, permanently, is going to put her in the frame of mind to be considering the ultimate end of their relationship. In addition, the memory removal of the Silence - and memory is such a powerful theme throughout the entirety of Moffat's run - ties in horribly with the way the Doctor loses memories of her, for all practical purposes at random. Her morose fixation on the day he will one day forget her, on having to be the one to remember because he cannot, on death, and, in a nonlinear relationship, whether that is a worse fate than being forgotten, is a mindset makes a certain amount of sense in the context of this adventure. It's a more complicated and sadder version of Amy and Rory's quiet look when the Doctor declares, in the finale scene, "you only live once!"
In conclusion, SHE THREW HERSELF OUT A BUILDING, with...no safety mechanism other than magic. That's some sexy, sexy trust there.
So, River. Awesome. Let's move on to the episode itself.
I was actually really impressed, on a plot and structural level with what this episode did. The Silence weren't really that terrifying in the last episode. An interesting idea maybe, but not truly horrifying. This episode really fixed that. Seeing them from Amy's perspective, suddenly the glowing in her hand, the screaming of her own voice, marks appearing all over her body - what they signify - suddenly seeing her own face in reflection, again covered. It's frightening enough I almost wish Moffat had reprised his postmodern style of handling the Angels in Blink (I will never not be sad that they moved on camera in the more recent episode; I always figured that wasn't actually what they looked like). But it wouldn't have worked longterm because we do need to interact with them more directly. Still it was an effective section of the episode for sure and really sold the idea.
Likewise I was very impressed with the resolution on two levels. Firstly I thought it was genuinely unexpected and clever, but very simple. Secondly, it's chilling.
I've seen some discussion around the interwebs about what it means that the Doctor essentially manipulated us all into the Manchurian Candidate in our own defense. I mean, I have thoughts about that: basically they fall in line with those who point out that if the Silence keep away they will be safe, and the fact that this is not the first time, not even in Nu!Who that the Doctor has done comparable things, but more than that, I'm not sure it's unjustifiable in this specific context in any event.
I appreciate the nuances of pacifism. I support the principles of nonaggression, but cannot, in good conscious, commit myself wholly to the principles of nonviolence because I don't believe it's practical or morally supportable across every situation as a blanket policy, much as I wish it were.
I want to examine two things - Ten taking down Harriet Jones and Eleven taking down the Silence. Now, I want to make it very clear that I do not think these things are comparable in terms of the threat or even the motivation, what I'm aiming at is a comparison of narrative message in terms of relative pacifism and the reasons behind an action.
Now, full disclosure, personally I think that the Tenth Doctor removed Harriet Jones from power because she asked him a question he couldn't answer (what happens when you're not here when they come back?) and he didn't like being questioned and it's, for me, one of the lowest points of the show. Meanwhile, I think that the specifics of the Silence mean that what the Doctor did was one of the few things he could do to defend us from invaders that had no qualms about murdering us and subjugating our wills even more violently than he did; what else could have been in that suggestion to save us?
But, the basic point remains that the Doctor took the choice away from us, and decided to act as parent figure. He unilaterally solved the problem. In the case of Harriet Jones, his moral imperative was pacifism, in the case of the Silence, it was delegated defence.
The difference, to me, from a narrative standpoint, is that I think I was supposed to find the Silence solution creepy and chilling and in keeping with the tone of the rest of the episode, whereas I think that I was supposed to stand with Ten in moral judgement of Harriet Jones.
I also feel that on dissection of the issues, I cannot find Ten's moral stance on Jones at all supportable given he failed to answer her simple question of what she was supposed to do if they came back and he wasn't around; he was effectively insisting she rely only on him as her Earth Defence System with no guarantee of his own reliability, whereas I find Eleven's moral stance on the Silence much more supportable, if deeply creepy. As I said before, given the nature of the threat, instant action is required or the opportunity is lost, or worse, they will implant you with a new hypnotic suggestion. Is it a fictional construct designed to offer no other option? Why yes, of course it is! But it's one I buy in the context of the story; it's consistent throughout it and the solution plays by those same rules. Unlike the Harriet Jones situation which comes across as problematic and hypocritical.
I guess my point is, I don't think slapping a "pacifist" label on something, even if it adheres to the strict definition of that label, means that it is necessarily "in character" for the Doctor. And similarly, actions that at first seem at odds with the Doctor's preference for nonviolence (because I do not think he is an active pacifist on the levels some others do), aren't necessarily "wrong" for the character or show simply because they do not conform to a basic, simple understanding of the term "pacifist" that so often gets tacked onto the Doctor because he is (wonderfully) unusual in the way he eschews violence as a solution.
However, even without that admittedly personal spin, I do think that the resolution to the Silence offers a lot more space for interpretation as to how we're supposed to feel about it. I don't think the Doctor did anything unjustifiable, but I love that it raises the question, and not in an overly simple way. I love that the resolution that I think is morally justifiable is also bone-chillingly creepy.
It's the stuff of nightmares, and I'm not sure that if season five wasn't a fairytale, season six won't be a nightmare.
All right, finally, let's talk about the TimeBaby.
This is where things get really associative and confused.
First off, let me just say that the visual of the kid regenerating was actually a lot cooler and more epic than I might have guessed; kind of like the creepiness of the astronaut visual.
That said, there are a LOT of pieces up in the air here. Thematically we're mixing up issues of memory, which was important last season too, particularly Amy's, with issues of conflicting realities - another theme from last year. Moffat's kink for parenthood rears its head too (which I think last season was mostly explored through childhood), and that's not something I inherently take issue with except when it's done badly, which it often is.
More than just Amy's Schroedinger baby, I can't help but notice Rory's on/off Roman Centurion memories. In turn perhaps this suggests a duality wherein the Doctor both is and isn't dead? The TimeBaby is said by River to be human based on the suit, but also incredibly strong (not a trait we've seen the Doctor exhibit), yet can regenerate like a Time Lord. What other properties of time does she have? Is she a Schroedinger Child? Is she real, and not, at the same time? How many timelines converge on her and who is she in any of them?
We have shit like River talking about the way a Time Lord's body is a miracle, specifically due to regeneration and how wars would be fought over a single cell. We have Amy finding a picture of herself with an infant. We have her kept captive for "many days" by the Silence talking about how she will "bring forth Silence" but her part will soon be over. Was that interrupted by the Doctor or are we missing stuff here?
How much are we missing in that three month gap that they (we) can't remember most of?
We have the child dressed as River was dressed when she first arrived in the Library episodes.
We have Moffat's penchant for timey-wimey own-timeline-crossing storylines. We have River and Amy both feeling sick when the Silence show up. We have Amy being concerned her baby will have a Time Head.
We have the confirmation of a romance between the Doctor and River which, in turn, necessitates a shocking twist for River's real identity. We have the hints that River killed the Doctor and we have the spaceman (I am still not convinced it was the child in it in 2011 but there's clearly a line drawn between the two) killing the Doctor.
Throw in the fact that the child keeps running from Team TARDIS after Amy's taken by the Silence (and as an aside here, how good was Karen Gillan in the scene where she's confronting a kid she's just found out might be hers that she tried to shoot who's in a creepy Doctor murdering astronaut suit? Very good), so she either doesn't know, or doesn't trust them? And the fact that there were a weird number of pictures of the child on that dressing table for a room only occupied by said child? More like the kind of thing the child's parent would put out?
While we're talking plot, not theme, is the reuse of the Lodger TARDIS from the last season coincidence or purposeful? The Doctor had a line about seeing an abandoned one of these at some point and I wasn't sure if that was in reference to the Lodger? If it was, given we have talk of the Silence scavenging technology, are they trying to build themselves a Time Lord to pilot their scavenged TARDIS?
On that note, why was she dying? Was the suit keeping her alive?
There's a giant clusterfuck of something going on here for sure. What intrigues and frightens me is I haven't the slightest clue how it'll be resolved but I'm having trouble seeing how to get out of this painted corner. If Moffat does it, it will be, frankly, extraordinary. But...how?
I will illustrate:
If the TimeBaby is nothing to do with either couple on Team TARDIS, then it'll be difficult to avoid that without seeming like a let down.
If it is something to do with Team TARDIS then the following two issues arise based on the most obvious potential red herrings in the plot:
1) the temptation to make her the child of one of said couples.
2) the temptation to make her a younger version of one of the women.
And how those two possibilities might interact in...weird ways.
Going with option 1), if it's Amy & Rory's baby, why does it have Time Abilities. I flat out don't believe it'd be Amy and the Doctor's child because I don't think the show would have them sleep together at this point and I don't think the show is quite creepy enough to have the Silence do weird forced IVF on her. It's a pretty scary show but kids still have to watch it and is pregnancy body horror really the way it's most likely to go? It doesn't fit Moffat's style, which I think would more likely see the Silence steal Amy's Time Baby because she had it in the first place to be stolen in a weird ontological paradoxy thing. But...could it really just be from traveling in a TARDIS? I suppose thematically it fits with sleeping next to a crack giving you magic memory, but I dunno, it seems to cheapen Time Lord abilities somehow, if you just need to gestate in a time machine to get them. Which is generally the issue if you make her any kind of Time Lord knock off - how to make it not feel like a fakeout, not feel cheap.
The alternative is to make the kid the Doctor's actual daughter which is a more thematically robust reason for her to have Time Powers, but that implies she's River's daughter too, per above with me not buying Amy/Doctor as the parents. In which case where does that leave Amy's Maybe Baby? Baby storylines are hard to pull off, and I actually trust that Moffat's a writer who can do it, but two at once? I know that was the tease with River also feeling ill (which I still believe is a red herring; if River has kids, I think she has them already), but on a practical level, we've got two potential mothers and one child here. Even setting aside my personal fear of NOES BABY PLOTLINES ARGH (because I had that about wedding plotlines too and S5 was lovely), there's a third wheel in that setup.
Going with option 2) (and I suppose the Silence provide a nice way of explaining neither Amy nor River would remember what happened to them), to be honest with you the biggest question I'd have is why? I mean, obviously Amy doesn't think she's a Time Lady, and I'm not sure how it would add anything to River to make her one either? Making either Amy or River a grown up version of the girl really only functions as a reveal of species. Amy already has a complex backstory, so I guess much as I'd favour Amy for option 1) I'd favour River for this option, but I still don't think it really works that well and requires she knows too much she's not telling unless she genuinely can't remember. It's perhaps the option that feels least immediately off course to me, but I still don't buy it.
If you start combining 1) and 2) then things get REALLY weird very quickly. We can't ever have Amy as River and the Doctor's daughter because she snogged him and this isn't Star Wars, and honestly, I'd be pretty hard to sell on River being Amy's daughter because then she's married to her own mother's best imaginary friend which is a bit creepy and her behaviour around Amy just doesn't add up that way to me.
What I'm saying is, this kid is either going to be a Time Lord or and Imitation Time Lord, and this kid is either going to be one of/related to one of Team TARDIS, or she isn't. But I think pretty much every one of those options has a heapload of problems, both narrative and more personal to me, and I can't see my way out of them?
That said, I really believe that Moffat could do it - write me a conclusion I can't see coming and/or sell me on one I did and dismissed. I'm just not 100% confident he will because television has ruined me...
AND THIS IS WHY I TRY NOT TO LET MYSELF THINK ABOUT THIS SHOW. I WRITE STUFF THAT'S THIS LONG.
But, I think, finally, I am finished.
Without even touching Creepy Dreaming Eyepatch Lady with a barge pole because clearly that's going somewhere and I have even less idea than usual.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
HELLO SWEETIE, have a properly long comment
Date: 2011-05-04 02:55 am (UTC)Speaking of which, can we talk about that kiss as if we're teenage girls at a sleepover? CAN WE?
I THINK WE ALREADY DID. <3 BUT IT WAS GREAT FUN. I loved it for the fact that she grabbed him and snogged him, that she genuinely thought he was still flirting and playing hard to get because he was so convincing, but his confidence in that area was all faked and he was actually totally off guard, that she kissed him like she’d been doing that all her life, and that he CLEARLY wanted to put his hands in her awesome hair but was too nervous or off-balance. I LOVED EVERYTHING ABOUT IT. I love how they just fall into this established thing, because it already exists. <3
I also thought we were supposed to be horrified by the solution on some level. It’s “happy” because the good guys win and the Silence leave, and clever because the horrifying way they operate was used against them, but also, the horrifying way they operate was still used on US. The possibility is still there that we will still do things and not remember and not know why.
On the reverse linearity thing and on the Time Baby thing, I don’t have Proper Thoughts and I fear many, many, many ways it could go too. But a couple of posts and your thoughts have like….shaken up my brain at least. I am not sure this is a good thing.
Firstly, on the reverse linearity thing, go and read everything this post says about being in an AU where the Doctor dies as Eleven and thus there is no Twelve or Thirteen for River to know. Like River was literally rewritten by the Doctor’s death. I admit I would EAT MANY MANY WORDS if it turned out to be purposeful that the reverse linearity doesn’t make sense given what we know, and that it’s being played up BECAUSE it doesn’t make sense and will need to be explained later. I obviously do not have as much faith in Moffat as the OP does, but I find myself with some level of dangerous hope. Because it actually makes a crazy sort of timey-wimey sense and I would love SO MUCH if part of the point of the season is to restore their timey wimey romance, especially since it calls back to River’s sacrifice in the Library but comes after we know her.
And now my brain is all off on another tangent, like is it possible River has to kill a very future Doctor in order to prevent THIS Doctor from being killed, thus restoring lots of timelines? How would that work? (But wouldn’t it be sort of awesome?)
On the Time Baby, what this post says about the focus on River while they are talking about the Silence made me pause? I went back and watched and it does seem possibly significant? And it brings me back to my weird pet theory that River has been somehow very connected with the Silence, or at least very familiar with them and their raising of super strong girls who run away. I still don’t want River to BE the girl, but I want to believe that’s not strictly necessary? I don't know HOW it could work but I’m still SO STRANGELY intrigued by the idea of River being somehow connected to the Silence, but being her own one woman revolution against them too. Make it work, Moffat! But my brain goes nowhere good with the whole idea of Amy's pregnancy, and how and whether that relates to River and the girl and the Silence, so not even going there right now.
Re: HELLO SWEETIE, have a properly long comment
Date: 2011-05-06 03:30 pm (UTC)I also definitely agree that this was a step up for River being an awesome action hero. It's something implied in her character from things like the Dalek, but we've never really seen it before and it was pretty awesome to get it like, confirmed on the telly, especially since Doctor Who really, generally, isn't about that so it makes it stand out all the more? (And obviously I don't want Doctor Who to become about that either, but River doing it As Her Cool Thing isn't that).
Thanks for the link to the first post - that is really interesting and a cool idea. I kind of hope it's true too? I went back and watched some bits of Silence in the Library again yesterday, and the way she's talking makes it super, SUPER clear that it's not in direct reverse time. I can't remember everything right now, but she says things like, "from your face I'm guessing early days, have we done "x"," and when he says no, she's like, "Blimey, VERY early!" and she comments to Donna her message to him "went wrong" and "arrived too early" or something. It's just...not even something you can interpret as anything other than more complicated linearity than these two episodes might imply?
With the look that they linger on that you mention, you're right, that might be significant. I thought it was because she was concerned that not even the Doctor could remember what they looked like? Like, that rattled her? But it could easily be something else...
I don't know HOW it could work but I’m still SO STRANGELY intrigued by the idea of River being somehow connected to the Silence, but being her own one woman revolution against them too. Make it work, Moffat! But my brain goes nowhere good with the whole idea of Amy's pregnancy, and how and whether that relates to River and the girl and the Silence, so not even going there right now.
Word.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-04 05:45 am (UTC)*squeals and squeals and falls over giggling, for real*
I LOVE THEM SO HARD. AND YES, HIS AWKWARD WHAT-DO-I-DO-WITH-MY-HANDS JUST WENT ON FOREVER WITHOUT EVER ACTUALLY MOVING AWAY FROM HER AND A FEW TIMES KIND OF TRYING TO TOUCH HER BUT THEN NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO AGAIN AAAAH.
Also yeah, I can't wrap my head around this weird insistence on them meeting in Reverse Linear Order Exactly now, because it *completely* contradicts all her behavior toward him with the diaries, trying to figure out 'where they are' every time she sees him, etc. Which is a *way better story* as well. (Edit: Also, I feel very strongly that I need to see the scene where Eleven eventually has to have that last date with her and give her the screwdriver knowing what's going to happen to her in the library, that he needs to *love* her by then, and I CANNOT DEAL with the idea that this already happened offscreen somehow with Ten.)
Really like your thoughts about the Silents resolution. Also my favorite response to it was somebody random who tweeted they were "wondering how many Silents I've killed in my life", which was just so funny and creepy at once.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-06 03:37 pm (UTC)I COSIGN THIS COMMENT.
The reverse linearity thing is so obviously Less Cool and Contradictory to what we knew before I'm gonna ignore it until I can't. I was rewatching bits of Silence in the Library the other day and it's just totally obvious she isn't sure where he is on his timeline when they're doing the diary checks. Like, completely, unavoidably obvious.
And don't worry, I refuse to believe that the last screwdriver scene happens with Ten EITHER. And I don't think it can be either because of how she talks about him, "the real you, the future you," and stuff when describing Future!Doc and idk, IT'S JUST NOT TEN. Plus that would have been a really weird last date, with him not knowing who she was for sure and she would have worked out something was up if he was crying and handing her his screwdriver AND hadn't a fucking clue who she was. The way Eleven avoids her when she first shows up again in S5 really doesn't fit with a guy who rushed off to cry and give her a screwdriver immediately after watching her die; I kind of got massive avoidance and fear of the future rather than rushing to tie up loose ends.
Look! I have slayed the notion with logic! :p
AND NOW I SHALL GO SLAY SOME SILENTS. If I...bump into them. And don't get killed trying to take one on with my bare hands...
Moffat is so good at bringing the funny and the creepy at the same time.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-05 02:25 am (UTC)but
If a soilder with a gun sees one bang bang its dead but what if a young child / 90 year old bumps into one are they going to immediately attempt to kill the creature with their bare hands.
Does the silence on earth represent the views wishes and ambitions of thier entire race. Is it fair to order the soon to be galaxy spanning human race to kill them on site for ever more (Battlefield Earth!)
Though i guess donning a helmet or mask would counter these problems.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-06 03:59 pm (UTC)None of these details changes the fact that what I liked about the resolution was its creepiness. Was the way it's a very disturbing thing to do. That it is a solution that will work, but might very well involve casualties. Of course, allowing the situation to continue would also involve casualties. Which type of casualty is best? To be murdered as a slave or as a revolutionary? If there is a third option, what is it?
The Doctor comments when he enters the lair of the Silence that he's seen one of these before, but abandoned and how he imagines he's about to find out why. He mentions the name of the road in The Lodger. The proto-TARDIS there was abandoned, presumably because the Silence DID flee the Earth after 69. Even if not every person who saw them was capable of killing them, the need to constantly fight back would have become untenable.
Your points about whether or not the Silence represented their entire race is another fair point to raise to which I counter, again, my contention was not that it was a morally impeccable choice but that (1) the episode acknowledged and allowed space for use to find it deeply creepy, and indeed, I think the episode works much better if we do and (2) within the scope of the episode, I certainly don't think it was more immoral than dooming the entirety of the human race to a life of slavery and arbitrary death and control on the offchance that there was a nice one out there somewhere. I'll more seriously consider that the Doctor should have done something else when someone presents to me a solution that doesn't involve letting people get eaten alive or people getting mind controlled on a species-wide level.
Until then, I will be satisfied with a really creepy, scary but effective solution, as long as the show treats it as creepy and scary, which I think it did.
That I think is where the matter of personal taste comes in. I very strongly feel that the episode encouraged me to feel chilled by the development at the same time as being impressed.
And like you say, to survive all the Silence need to do is avoid humans, and if that is not possible, disguise their appearance. It's not an instant death sentence.
I also think that the memory issue is unlikely to be coincidental. It's too similar to the last season's continued themes of memory, what you can and can't remember, and being unable to remember key, important events that have happened to you, and how that affects you psychologically. I wouldn't be surprised to see this come back at some point, especially given that, arguably, what the Doctor did in Day of the Moon in 1969 was the motivation for the Silence trying to blow up his TARDIS and destroy him in The Pandorica Opens in 2010 which also ended the whole universe. Which is one helluva piece of comeuppance for his actions if that's the case.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-06 12:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-06 04:05 pm (UTC)If nothing else, I kind of feel like pregnancy horror is too scifi for a show that's skewing much more dark fairytale these days. So...what's the fairytale equivalent? A changeling child in some capacity? Some kind of riffing off of at least the possibility of changeling themes - who's child, stolen child, evil child - seems more likely to me, right now than a focus on pregnancy horror?
But...I would not put any money on anything at this point. It's just too damn confusing!
no subject
Date: 2011-05-11 06:44 pm (UTC)Just wanted to say that your thoughts on the whole resolution to the episode and its inherent creepiness and questionable nature very much mirror my own, and I was very happy to see others were thinking along similar lines (and had bothered to type it up, thus saving me the effort).
Also agree that every possible answer on the pregnancy/astronaut Time Baby front seems wrong. And I don't know whether to be worried or intrigued that a part of me is honestly expecting Moff to make the answer ALL OF THE ABOVE and and to still make it awesome anyway. Probably I put to much faith in this guy . . .
no subject
Date: 2011-05-31 08:06 am (UTC)...we never did see Jenny again...
no subject
Date: 2011-06-01 11:03 am (UTC)As regards Jenny, I'd love to see her again. I heard someone tell me (so take with a grain of salt) that originally Jenny was going to die at the end of that episode, but Moffat said to RTD during a discussion that that was the boring, safe option that most scifi shows would go for and they should keep her alive instead. I wish if they were going to do that, people could have known, cus I still think she's probably off to be...forgotten about for a really long time, but she was an interesting character.
It'd definitely be unexpected if she came back, though I'm not sure why she'd have regressed to being a child again? Though it could be her child?
My gut instinct is that Jenny's too much of an obscure one-shot character to bring back as a key part of the resolution of this storyline without reintroducing/mentioning her to the audience, the way River Song was, for instance, but...it's Moffat so I'm not willing to rule anything out!
no subject
Date: 2011-06-01 08:35 pm (UTC)My gut agrees with you about her not actually having had any kind of Chekov's gun for this, especially since there needs to be some sort of explanation for the Heisenbaby, but it would be pretty cool and also not have River or Amy be necessarily the mother, which I feel is kind of too obvious for me to want it to be true.