Doctor Who!!~

[Strangelove]

it still seems like a dick move for steven moffat to take what rtd came up with and basically writing it out of existence simply because he didn't like it. i get he is in charge now and he's a fanboy and all with his own strong opinions, but still. dick.

[/poorly informed opinions]

 

[Ⓐaron]

it's arguably not really that big of a retcon though if you actually look at the details (gallifrey went from being in one kind of stasis to being in a slightly different kind of stasis), that's what people are arguing about

also teefury has another really cool who-related design. this time it's a harry potter-related crossover. not sure if i'm going to get this one but i still have another nineteen and a half hours to make up my mind

 

[Super Mario]

So lemme get this straight, is gallifrey dead? or is it hidden somewhere away with only Doc capable of bringing them out into our universe? I dont know whats real anymore with this timey whimey shit.

 

[Ⓐaron]

By all accounts, it's time-locked, same as it apparently was in The End of Time. My understanding of events is that the difference is that in The End of Time, the entire Time War was time-locked, while now just Gallifrey has been time-locked.

 

[Dana Scully]

• Disentegrating someone = killing them.
• Cryogenically black hole trapping someone = the equivalent of killing them.
• Cyrogenically black hole trapping someone about to be disentegrated = ...somehow NOT the equivalent as still killing them in a different way, because the underlying motivation is different?

Oh my gooodddd it actually boggles my mind how you can equate potentially saving his people to killing them outright. They are completely different things. If you can't see that then I honestly have no more words.

The point I was making is that because of the mechanics of how the consciousness of The Moment exists across space-time and how adjustments to a single individual's timeline work in Doctor Who (examples given), Gallifrey STILL ALWAYS BURNED, and thus that argument that DotD was rubbish for making it so that "Gallifrey Never Burned" is completely and utterly incorrect, so that stance isn't even a valid argument against the actual story's literary value.

Dude I have absolutely no idea where you're getting all this from. It was made very clear in DotD that no, Gallifrey most definitely did not burn. The Moment did what it did based on the idea of it burning, not on it actually happening. Even Moffat himself said "[the Doctor] wouldn't [burn Gallifrey], of course he didn't do it." Didn't, past-tense, as in it never burned at all because of what happened in DotD.

Bad Wolf Rose exists in a space-time frame of reference that is literally identical to that of The Moment in The Day of the Doctor. They both witness him across all of space and time, and in DotD The Moment's intervention only works because of who the Doctor becomes over the 400 years

But it works on all three of them?? I mean Eleven might have been the first to step away but both Ten and the War Doctor were just as quick to follow. It's not like one of them was like NO I REFUSE and pushed the button anyways because they lacked those 400 years of character development.

it's arguably not really that big of a retcon though if you actually look at the details (gallifrey went from being in one kind of stasis to being in a slightly different kind of stasis), that's what people are arguing about

Gallifrey was originally nothing but spacedust with no chance of ever being un-spacedusted. The Doctor says it himself in End of the World. That is very much a different thing from being in stasis.

So lemme get this straight, is gallifrey dead? or is it hidden somewhere away with only Doc capable of bringing them out into our universe? I dont know whats real anymore with this timey whimey shit.

Gallifrey was zapped into a static pocket universe, essentially, using the same technology the Zygons used to transport themselves into the paintings. For some reason the Doctor doesn't actually know where this pocket universe is, but Gallifrey can be found and saved via outside intervention.

@Aaron: I'm pretty sure the Time War is still time-locked - all that changed was that when the Moment zapped Gallifrey away it freed Gallifrey from that time-lock. The time-lock was already in place, after all, before the Doctors did their group magic trick.

 

[Super Mario]

So Gallifrey is time-locked and the time war continued on with the daleks all looking like puzzled fools wondering who their opponents are? Or are they fighting weeping angels? or cybermen?


the confusion.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

No, the Time War ended right there with the Daleks all blasting each other and nearly eradicating their entire race on their own since the target they had all surrounded got whisked away.

And the Dalek Emperor from "The Parting of the Ways" is apparently too stupid to notice the difference between that and The Doctor using a powerful weapon against them and the Time Lords. Or so Moffat would have us believe.

 

[Super Mario]

So when the daleks anal'd themselves, the Dalek Emperor ship survives but can't remember anything because by the time of Bad Wolf and Parting, he has lost mind due to reconstructing or in Ten's words during Stolen Earth, "Scavenging" most of his fleet? This is a plot twist.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

That's one word for it. =P

Even Moffat himself said "[the Doctor] wouldn't [burn Gallifrey], of course he didn't do it." Didn't, past-tense, as in it never burned at all because of what happened in DotD.

He really said that? I haven't seen that interview, but if he's really trying to refute even the possibility that Rose changed history, then what a fucking gimp.

If he said exactly that, then I have to re-emphasize what I said before about how he doesn't get The Doctor at all.

 

[Roger]

So when the daleks anal'd themselves, the Dalek Emperor ship survives but can't remember anything because by the time of Bad Wolf and Parting, he has lost mind due to reconstructing or in Ten's words during Stolen Earth, "Scavenging" most of his fleet? This is a plot twist.

Dalek Emperor didn't use a mere Emergency Temporal Shift to enter/escape the Timewar like Caan nor did he use his own flesh to create his army like Davros nor did he burn in a wreckage for a fortnight like the Metaltron. The Dalek Emperor was of sound mind, save for being a Dalek and everything.

 

[Super Mario]

God! This is very confusing!! How can he not remember and not tell Doc #9 that "Yo man I saw the planet vanish, and we killed ourselves for you lol". Might be embarrassing to say it but at least an implication may have been there to think that Gallifrey stands instead of falling to oblivion.

 

[Dana Scully]

He really said that? I haven't seen that interview, but if he's really trying to refute even the possibility that Rose changed history, then what a fucking gimp.

Full quote:

He wouldn’t. He wouldn’t. I don’t care what’s at stake, he’s not going to do it. So that was the story – of course he never did that. He couldn’t have. He’s the Doctor, he’s the man who doesn’t do that. He’s defined by the fact that he doesn’t do that. Whatever the cost, he will find another way. So it had to be the story of what really happened that he’s forgotten.

sauce

Soooo, yeah, as far as Moffat's concerned Gallifrey never ever burned in any timeline ever.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Gallifrey was originally nothing but spacedust with no chance of ever being un-spacedusted. The Doctor says it himself in End of the World. That is very much a different thing from being in stasis.

I haven't watched The End of the World in awhile so I don't remember that line, but The End of Time clearly establishes that Gallifrey is time-locked along with the entire remainder of the Time War in The End of Time, which is a completely different thing from being eradicated for good, so RTD apparently gave the Doctor a bit of a multiple-choice past or just retconned his own writing. How the hell could Rassilon manage to make the Time Lords return if there were "no chance of [Gallifrey] ever being un-spacedusted"? Rassilon's entire plan rests on that not being the case. Moffat isn't the only one guilty of retconning apparently.

Re: "he never did that", well, he found another way in The Parting of the Ways too, so I'm not sure the circumstances are really that different. There's a difference between contemplating an action and actually going through with it, and one thing that has defined the Doctor's character pretty consistently is his hatred of genocide.

 

[Ⓐaron]

The Doctor is the character who, when offered the chance to commit genocide against the fucking Daleks, probably the most unambiguously evil race in the entire Whoniverse, still can't bring himself to do it. The idea that he would commit genocide against his own people always rang false.

 

[Ⓐaron]

One other thing that might be worth pointing out is that the Doctor post-Time War (and pre-DotD) is a somewhat different character than the Doctor during or before the Time War. From Nine through most of Eleven's lifespan, he believes that he already has committed genocide against his own people, which means that there is less there keeping him from doing it again. So yeah, Ten in particular is a lot more untethered and in episodes like "The Runaway Bride" and "The Waters of Mars" can be considered to cross lines that earlier incarnations of the character probably wouldn't have even considered crossing. But even then it's something of a "depending on the writer" thing - in "The Doctor's Daughter" he makes a memorable stance about killing in cold blood: "I never would". (Then again, this principle is also a "depending on the writer" thing and also depends somewhat on the incarnation).

On the whole, however his opposition to genocide has been a pretty constant defining trait of the Doctor's character.

I don't know where I'm going with this. I've probably been up too long.

 

[Carlie]

The Doctor is the character who, when offered the chance to commit genocide against the fucking Daleks, probably the most unambiguously evil race in the entire Whoniverse, still can't bring himself to do it. The idea that he would commit genocide against his own people always rang false.

Wasn't it because by the end of the Time War the Time Lords (I know not all of them) had become even worse than the Daleks? As shown in The End of Time.

 

[Dana Scully]

I haven't watched The End of the World in awhile so I don't remember that line, but The End of Time clearly establishes that Gallifrey is time-locked along with the entire remainder of the Time War in The End of Time, which is a completely different thing from being eradicated for good, so RTD apparently gave the Doctor a bit of a multiple-choice past or just retconned his own writing. How the hell could Rassilon manage to make the Time Lords return if there were "no chance of [Gallifrey] ever being un-spacedusted"? Rassilon's entire plan rests on that not being the case. Moffat isn't the only one guilty of retconning apparently.

How I've always understood it is that the time-lock and the destruction are two different events, with the time-lock having been put in place first to ensure no one escaped the final big boom. So EoT features that time period between the time-lock being placed and the Doctor using the Moment to blow everything to hell and gone. DotD supports all that, as Gallifrey is clearly already under the time-lock before any decisions regarding button-pushing are made.

Like, the War was never just ended via time-lock, actual ultimate destruction occurred (there was also that line about the Doctor watching 10 million Dalek ships burn).

Re: "he never did that", well, he found another way in The Parting of the Ways too, so I'm not sure the circumstances are really that different. There's a difference between contemplating an action and actually going through with it, and one thing that has defined the Doctor's character pretty consistently is his hatred of genocide.

The Doctor is the character who, when offered the chance to commit genocide against the fucking Daleks, probably the most unambiguously evil race in the entire Whoniverse, still can't bring himself to do it.

The "coward every time" scene was fucking brilliant and wonderful and all the more beautiful because this was a man talking from experience. Of course he hates genocide, he's always hated genocide and you can be damn sure he hated killing off two entire races to end a war, but he did it because there was literally no other choice (obviously ignoring DotD here). And he learned just how much it cost him to push that button and knew he could never make that choice again, hence that scene in PotW.

The idea that he would commit genocide against his own people always rang false.

You really think the Doctor would just stand by and let his own people destroy all of creation? Ignore the remarkably convenient timey-wimey solution presented in DotD for a second, and just focus on his choice as it was presented for the first 7 series of NuWho: destroy his own people (plus Daleks) or let the entire universe die because of their arrogance. Those were the only options. You don't honestly think the Doctor would choose the latter, do you?

I mean, I agree, he detests genocide - or killing on any scale - to the very core of his being. But when the only options are committing a small (on the scale of things) genocide vs allowing the biggest genocide of all time what else could he possibly do?

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

He really said that? I haven't seen that interview, but if he's really trying to refute even the possibility that Rose changed history, then what a fucking gimp.

Full quote:

He wouldn’t. He wouldn’t. I don’t care what’s at stake, he’s not going to do it. So that was the story – of course he never did that. He couldn’t have. He’s the Doctor, he’s the man who doesn’t do that. He’s defined by the fact that he doesn’t do that. Whatever the cost, he will find another way. So it had to be the story of what really happened that he’s forgotten.

sauce

Soooo, yeah, as far as Moffat's concerned Gallifrey never ever burned in any timeline ever.

What ... the fuck

He's a fucking idiot.

Has he seriously never seen "The Fires of Pompeii"? Where did The Doctor "find another way" in that episode?

As Moffat explains: “I remember thinking, ‘what was the most important occasion in the Doctor’s life?’ Obviously it was the day he blew up Gallifrey. Then I tried to imagine what writing that scene would be like, and I thought literally – there’s kids on Gallifrey and he’s going to push the button. He wouldn’t. He wouldn’t. I don’t care what’s at stake, he’s not going to do it.

Right, and there weren't any kids in Pompeii? Moron.

So it had to be the story of what really happened that he’s forgotten. Of course he didn’t! He’s Doctor Who. He doesn’t do things like that.

He's what?

Moffat doesn't even get the joke in the show's title. Yeah, clearly he understands the character and show. Ugh.

One other thing that might be worth pointing out is that the Doctor post-Time War (and pre-DotD) is a somewhat different character than the Doctor during or before the Time War. From Nine through most of Eleven's lifespan, he believes that he already has committed genocide against his own people, which means that there is less there keeping him from doing it again. So yeah, Ten in particular is a lot more untethered and in episodes like "The Runaway Bride" and "The Waters of Mars" can be considered to cross lines that earlier incarnations of the character probably wouldn't have even considered crossing. But even then it's something of a "depending on the writer" thing - in "The Doctor's Daughter" he makes a memorable stance about killing in cold blood: "I never would". (Then again, this principle is also a "depending on the writer" thing and also depends somewhat on the incarnation).

Killing in cold blood is a completely different thing from the situation with The Moment or in "The Fires of Pompeii," however.

 

[Ⓐaron]

What ... the fuck

He's a fucking idiot.

Has he seriously never seen "The Fires of Pompeii"? Where did The Doctor "find another way" in that episode?

There's a difference between letting a city die and letting an entire species die. It's pretty clear to me that Moffat isn't talking about the former. Interview remarks are generally off-the-cuff and probably not even quoted in full (plus in this case the interviewer's questions were omitted so it's not even clear what he's responding to) so you can't attach too much context to them.

He's what?

Moffat doesn't even get the joke in the show's title. Yeah, clearly he understands the character and show. Ugh.

Again. Off-the-cuff remarks. He probably just misspoke. Or for that matter the person who transcribed them may have made a transcription error. Buzzfeed is not exactly a site renowned for its professional writing.

Killing in cold blood is a completely different thing from the situation with The Moment or in "The Fires of Pompeii," however.

My point is that the Doctor's characterisation has always varied widely depending on the writer and incarnation but the character's opposition to genocide has been an almost universally constant aspect of the character.

How I've always understood it is that the time-lock and the destruction are two different events, with the time-lock having been put in place first to ensure no one escaped the final big boom. So EoT features that time period between the time-lock being placed and the Doctor using the Moment to blow everything to hell and gone. DotD supports all that, as Gallifrey is clearly already under the time-lock before any decisions regarding button-pushing are made.

Like, the War was never just ended via time-lock, actual ultimate destruction occurred (there was also that line about the Doctor watching 10 million Dalek ships burn).

But... the entire plan in EoT literally wouldn't work if the big boom were inescapable. At all. If it's really an inescapable, fixed point in time, then the Time Lords being defeated is a foregone conclusion and there is no dramatic tension in EoT whatsoever. If Rassilon's plan has even the remotest chance of succeeding then it's actually a case where time can still be rewritten, in which case the boom isn't inescapable. So as far as I can tell, either this is a plot hole in RTD's writing or it's just an example of him retconning himself. Either way it's a case where the show has been inconsistent and it's not surprising Moffat went with the later and more detailed established chronology of events.

You really think the Doctor would just stand by and let his own people destroy all of creation? Ignore the remarkably convenient timey-wimey solution presented in DotD for a second, and just focus on his choice as it was presented for the first 7 series of NuWho: destroy his own people (plus Daleks) or let the entire universe die because of their arrogance. Those were the only options. You don't honestly think the Doctor would choose the latter, do you?

I mean, I agree, he detests genocide - or killing on any scale - to the very core of his being. But when the only options are committing a small (on the scale of things) genocide vs allowing the biggest genocide of all time what else could he possibly do?

Take a third option, as he's always done. Again, the idea that the character wouldn't find another way, especially after he's had an additional four hundred years to think about it and revisit his own actions, always rang false.

Wasn't it because by the end of the Time War the Time Lords (I know not all of them) had become even worse than the Daleks? As shown in The End of Time.

Not all of them, just their leaders, as is shown in detail in DotD. Do you really think the Doctor would commit genocide against an entire race because of the actions of their leaders?

Before people go saying this is a retcon, it's really not. EoT makes it clear that the only reason Rassilon was even in control at the time is because he killed literally everyone who was in his way.

 

[Roger]

But... the entire plan in EoT literally wouldn't work if the big boom were inescapable. At all. If it's really an inescapable, fixed point in time, then the Time Lords being defeated is a foregone conclusion and there is no dramatic tension in EoT whatsoever. If Rassilon's plan has even the remotest chance of succeeding then it's actually a case where time can still be rewritten, in which case the boom isn't inescapable. So as far as I can tell, either this is a plot hole in RTD's writing or it's just an example of him retconning himself. Either way it's a case where the show has been inconsistent and it's not surprising Moffat went with the later and more detailed established chronology of events.

Rassilon's solution was made possible by driving a man insane and would have destroyed Earth and all it's inhabitants. Also would have unleashed the Time Lords on the universe again, which in itself isn't something Tenth was keen on. But if that solution neccesitates that there must be other solutions then yeah, I'd rather RTD didn't do End of Time at all. Preserving the idea that the Doctor exists in a world where there isn't always be a bloodless third option available is more important IMO.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

But... the entire plan in EoT literally wouldn't work if the big boom were inescapable. At all. If it's really an inescapable, fixed point in time, then the Time Lords being defeated is a foregone conclusion and there is no dramatic tension in EoT whatsoever. If Rassilon's plan has even the remotest chance of succeeding then it's actually a case where time can still be rewritten, in which case the boom isn't inescapable. So as far as I can tell, either this is a plot hole in RTD's writing or it's just an example of him retconning himself. Either way it's a case where the show has been inconsistent and it's not surprising Moffat went with the later and more detailed established chronology of events.

It was a retcon, but not an inconsistency. The reason Rassilon had to come up with that plan to begin with was because the Time Lock was going to prevent escape by normal means when The Moment was used.

I'd also have to disagree that just because something is a fixed point it can't be tampered with. The Master created a paradox in "Last of the Time Lords" and used the TARDIS to maintain the tampering to history.

I also have to disagree that The Doctor won't commit genocide. "The Runaway Bride" being an obvious example.


Anyway, my hate for the 50th has been reignited in full ferocity, but I won't be melodramatic and ragequit the thread again. I think it would be unhealthy for me not to vent the angry.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Rassilon's solution was made possible by driving a man insane and would have destroyed Earth and all it's inhabitants. Also would have unleashed the Time Lords on the universe again, which in itself isn't something Tenth was keen on. But if that solution neccesitates that there must be other solutions then yeah, I'd rather RTD didn't do End of Time at all. Preserving the idea that the Doctor exists in a world where there isn't always be a bloodless third option available is more important IMO.

I agree that sometimes there isn't always a third option in real life. But on the other hand DW isn't real life, and it's also pretty unbelievable that after four hundred years of thinking a character as resourceful as the Doctor wouldn't come up with one for the action he believes he's committed that he has come to loathe himself for more than any other in his entire life.

It was a retcon, but not an inconsistency. The reason Rassilon had to come up with that plan to begin with was because the Time Lock was going to prevent escaping by normal means when The Moment was used.

My point is that if Rassilon can come up with a plan to escape the time lock and the destruction of Gallifrey then that makes it clear that the destruction of Gallifrey already wasn't inescapable. So because of this Moffat's retcon... isn't as big of a retcon as people are acting like it is.

I'd also have to disagree that just because something is a fixed point it can't be tampered with. The Master created a paradox in "Last of the Time Lords" and used the TARDIS to maintain the tampering to history.

This is something the show has been wildly inconsistent with. Way back in The Aztecs the show claims that fixed points in history can't be altered. (Actually if memory serves the episode claims that history can't be altered at all, which is obviously wildly inconsistent with future episodes of the show and just underscores my point about how inconsistent the show has been about it). This is pretty clearly something of a depending-on-the-writer thing, but the Moffat era has been pretty consistent that fixed points in time can't be altered, since the plot of the sixth series centred around the idea that the Doctor was going to die at the end of it, and the only reason he didn't die at the end is because no one had ever seen what they thought they had.

I also have to disagree that The Doctor won't commit genocide. "The Runaway Bride" being an obvious example.

As I said in my post above, "The Runaway Bride" is an example of the post-Time War Doctor who believes he's already committed genocide. Not comparable to the Doctor in the Time War itself. When you believe you've crossed already a boundary you have less hesitancy about crossing it again. Compare this to, as I alluded to above, the iconic scene in Genesis of the Daleks.

 

[X-SOLDIER]

Oh my gooodddd it actually boggles my mind how you can equate potentially saving his people to killing them outright. They are completely different things. If you can't see that then I honestly have no more words.

Did you seriously just ignore LITERALLY the next thing I wrote after that, where I explain that the intent is different - which is addressed in DotD, but the immediate consequences are the same, and the long-term potential is different? Sure it seems like I'm being unreasonable if you're cherry picking quotes and cutting them off to make it look like I'm saying something different than I really am.

Dude I have absolutely no idea where you're getting all this from. It was made very clear in DotD that no, Gallifrey most definitely did not burn. The Moment did what it did based on the idea of it burning, not on it actually happening.

*sigh*

See, this is why I explained how Time Travel works in Doctor Who previously...

The Moment says, "Do you want to see who you become if you burn Gallifrey?" (paraphrase). If you're a trans-temporal entity - it's not an IDEA, it's a reality. She brought him to see the reality of who he became as a result of that action. Up until he actually rewrites his timeline by passing through his own timestream, Gallifrey burned by his hand. His timeline doesn't have a burned Gallifrey in it anymore, because he changed those events with his future selves, BECAUSE of who he became by burning it. Again, "no more" NOT "never."

But it works on all three of them?? I mean Eleven might have been the first to step away but both Ten and the War Doctor were just as quick to follow. It's not like one of them was like NO I REFUSE and pushed the button anyways because they lacked those 400 years of character development.

No, but they were influenced by Eleven's 400 years of character development. He's the one who pulls back and shuts down The Moment. The other key point is that there are three of them there, and not one of them - thus making it different from the previous scenario.

Gallifrey was originally nothing but spacedust with no chance of ever being un-spacedusted. The Doctor says it himself in End of the World. That is very much a different thing from being in stasis.

Yes, because 1) This is what he would have knowledge of because in DotD he's not moving parallel to his own timestream, and thus only the latest version of himself retains the knowledge of altering his own past and 2) depending on if you're looking at the progression of the events in the NuWho Series as being the Doctor's timestream, rather than his timeline - it's still true.

Example: In Clara's timestream, she entered the Heart of the TARDIS. In Clara's timeline, she never entered the Heart of the TARDIS. Saying Gallifrey never burned because of DotD is like saying that Clara never died in the Heart of the TARDIS, because she prevented it with her intervention.

Both events happened.

Gallifrey was zapped into a static pocket universe, essentially, using the same technology the Zygons used to transport themselves into the paintings. For some reason the Doctor doesn't actually know where this pocket universe is, but Gallifrey can be found and saved via outside intervention.

Yes, this is the entire point of DotD.

@Aaron: I'm pretty sure the Time War is still time-locked - all that changed was that when the Moment zapped Gallifrey away it freed Gallifrey from that time-lock. The time-lock was already in place, after all, before the Doctors did their group magic trick.

Yes, it's still stated as being a time-locked event in DotD. If it weren't, some of the Time Lords & Daleks would've just Ctrl+Z'd out of the event with their time machines. The Moment is the only reason any of the non-War Doctors were able to enter that event.



X

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

So, X, you do feel that Gallifrey originally burned? I want to believe that, and it would fix everything if it did, but in the quote Y linked, Moffat does say he decided that it never happened in the first place and The Doctor only thought it did because he couldn't remember (due to future incarnations being there, presumably).

 

[Ⓐaron]

On a lighter note, looks like Gallifrey has been found IRL.