Doctor Who: "A Good Man Goes to War" Spoiler Discussion Post
Posted 4 June 2011 in Doctor Who by Catriona
As with the end of season four, when we were all really cranky and wanted to talk about Donna’s lobotomy before the ABC aired the episode, I’m thinking a spoiler thread about the mid-season finale of season six might come in handy here.
It’s just an idea I had …
I think I might be right …
So, keep the spoilers in the comments below.
Anyone who’s keeping themselves free of spoilers, ‘ware the comments thread.
Share your thoughts [17]
1
Catriona wrote at Jun 4, 11:50 pm
What my concern with this episode comes down to is pretty much covered in this strange conversation from a couple of weeks back, when we were talking about the idea that River Song would turn out to be Bernice Summerfield.
I said then and I say again that tying River (who has previously been an awesome and autonomous character) into another character in this way is a zero-sum game.
It just feels, to me, as though they’re slowly narrowing the boundaries of the Doctor’s inner circle, until it becomes some sort of clique, and you have to have the right kind of DNA to get in.
That worries me, because the possibilities used to be so broad. You could be a research scientist, or a naval officer, or a Victorian girl, or an astronaut, or an air hostess, or an MI5 operative, or a school teacher, or an air hostess. You could be any number of things and still end up the Doctor’s companion. And that was such a rush for those of us sitting at home thinking about which of those things we might want to be while we waited for the TARDIS to arrive.
This feels like a narrowing of the boundaries and a narrowing of the possibilities. I’m not entirely happy with it.
And I still don’t think my concerns in that strange conversations thread have been addressed by this episode.
2
Nick wrote at Jun 5, 12:07 am
I was hoping for a slightly more epic revelation, but ultimately I guess these kinds of mysteries are always disappointing when finally revealed.
Going on the evidence of my Twitter stream, if we don’t see a Victorian Silurian lesbian detective spin-off series in a year there’ll be a riot.
3
Catriona wrote at Jun 5, 12:14 am
Don’t get me wrong (great: now I have that song stuck in my head): there was much about this episode I really, really liked. Especially the lovely (and successful, for once) fake out at the beginning. But I’m really struggling to some extent with the big revelation.
4
Nick wrote at Jun 5, 12:14 am
River’s identity as Amy’s daughter was one of the leading candidates in fan speculation for a few months now, too, which did somewhat blunt the impact for me. Though I did like Paul Cornell’s series of joke speculations last night (including Old Mother from “The Unearthly Child”).
5
Catriona wrote at Jun 5, 12:15 am
Yes, I know fans have been talking about it for a while. And I wasn’t surprised by it. Just a bit … annoyed and worried.
6
richard wrote at Jun 5, 06:35 am
There’s some wonderful stuff in that episode, but I found it very, very odd: as if it were plucked out of the middle of a very different show. I won’t try to dissect it – I need at least one more viewing!
River as Melody? I’m not sure I like it at all. Fine and fun, as long as you don’t think about it too hard. Once the term ‘cradle-snatcher’ lodges itself in your brain, however… well, it can’t be rewritten.
I’m hoping for a better explanation of when ‘they’ abducted Amy. ‘Just before America’ doesn’t really cut it.
Finally (for now), I don’t understand what River was trying to get the Doctor to read on the cradle. Her name? In Galifreyan? Sorry, what?
7
Catriona wrote at Jun 5, 07:27 am
Literally cradle-snatching, in this case.
I’m really not comfortable with the idea of man helping to raise his own wife. I know we have no evidence that that’s what happens here, and I severely doubt it will be what happens here, but I remain uncomfortable with it. (And that includes not just this episode, but also, for example, an L.M. Montgomery short story in which that’s exactly what happens. It’s not the most uncommon motif, and it creeps me out a little. It would creep me out as much if it were a woman raising her future husband, but, oddly enough, that doesn’t seem to happen in many texts. At least, none that I can think of.)
I think, Richard, what she was showing him was the prayer leaf, which just happened to be lying in the cradle. But I’ve only decided that after some thinking about it, because for something that apparently isn’t relevant, there certainly was a lot of focus on the uninterpretable Gallifreyan.
And yes: I want to know when they abducted her. I was assuming sometime in the middle of the American adventure, which would explain the apparently disappearing pregnancy: Amy is pregnant, they seize their opportunity (and Amy), and dump the ganger Amy, who isn’t pregnant, in her place. All holes in the story neatly closed. But it seems that’s not what happened at all.
I’ll be live-blogging this, and there’ll be room for discussion then. I just thought it might be nice to have a space where we could say “WTF?” in the time between now and next Saturday.
8
Drew wrote at Jun 6, 03:37 am
Surely, logically in a story involving time travel, age is irrelevant, provided some boundaries are kept that is. I was disturbed in the Time Traveller’s Wife when the Traveller (who name I can’t remember) turned up and befriended his future wife when she was 6 years old (or somewhere around that age) even though he had her express permission to do so from her adult self. But with the Doctor, whoever he gets involved with, there is always going to be the option that he could have had contact with that person as a child. What relevant here is not the suggestions of inappropriateness but intention. Everyone is young compared to the Doctor, everyone human that is. He could just as easily dazzle and sweep away a woman in her 50s as one in her 20s, at some point I guess we just have to trust that he wont abuse that potential that he always will have.
9
Drew wrote at Jun 6, 03:43 am
What I am trying to say is that term “cradle-snatching” really has no meaning here. It’s too human and can’t apply. The Doctor would be cradle-snatching even if he was romantically involved with a human woman at the latter end of her life. The same argument with even more emphasis could be made about Captain Jack and yet no one did, he was already a few hundred years old when Torchwood was set, that seemed to bother no one.
10
Matt wrote at Jun 6, 04:39 am
As I remember it, Amy was strapped into a harness similar to the ones used for controlling gangers at some point in the opening double episode of this season.
I thought this episode was really clunky and terrible at the end. I enjoyed it up until everyone died after which it started rushing and spurting stupidity all over the place. I was so disappointed that they got all those awesome characters together just to kill them off for no good reason.
I pretty much hate every episode where The Doctor is revered like some kind of superhero, including when he does his “I am the Doctor” motif. I much prefer the adventures when he’s anonymous and there’s a sense of peril. (Which is why I also enjoyed the fake-out at the start)
As for River Song? That’s pretty cool. I don’t think the Doctor raises Melody though because he seemed genuinely surprised and then a little embarrassed and then seemed to come to terms with the idea in a cute little sequence of non-verbals.
I’m just really cut up at the way it played out at the end and wish we could have seen more of the Doctor’s “army” and less of the “OMG it’s The Doctor, it’s really him!” dialog.
11
Catriona wrote at Jun 6, 04:46 am
Yes, but Drew, my concern with “cradle snatching” isn’t about the age difference. In that respect, “cradle snatching” was entirely the wrong word for me to use. I’m concerned with the idea that the Doctor might have some role in raising his future wife/lover (whichever she is), which to me is creepy in the most patriarchal fashion possible.
My discomfort with this is not unique to Doctor Who. I’m just a bit creeped out to find Doctor Who even flirting with that idea.
Age difference bothers me, too, but only when there’s a strong disparity in emotional, intellectual, or (in some cases) physical maturity. 70-year-old man with a 35-year-old girlfriend (or vice versa)? Don’t care. 35-year-old man with a 16-year-old girlfriend (or vice versa)? Not comfortable with the power differential in that situation at all.
12
Catriona wrote at Jun 6, 04:49 am
Yes, Matt: I think that was at the end of the second episode, just before they all came bursting in to rescue her. But was she off-screen for any point after that? Because, if not, that was already the ganger Amy.
I’m with you on the crack team of superheroes. But I did enjoy Rory coming over all centurion again.
13
Drew wrote at Jun 6, 07:20 am
But that is my point, where humans are concerned there will always be an age difference, a huge discrepancy, the Doctor is always going to be in a position of power. That said, look beyond it, has anything in River’s relationship with the Doctor ever suggested that she isn’t more than capable of dealing with him on completely equal terms? She may be in awe of him (and so is half the universe for that matter), but I don’t get the feeling that she’s not his equal.
14
Catriona wrote at Jun 6, 08:46 am
Again, I’ve brought issues in this that aren’t really what I’m concerned with here. Ignore everything I said about disparate ages = unequal power. That’s what I’m concerned with in the real world. It’s not what I’m concerned with here.
I agree with Matt: it doesn’t look as though the Doctor has anything to do with River’s upbringing, or he’d, more likely than not, recognise her. (Except we know she’s regenerated once. Who’s to say she hasn’t regenerated more than once?) All I’m saying here (human-alien concepts aside) is that I’ve never been happy with texts that touch on the “what man wouldn’t like to raise his own wife?” concept, and I’m uncomfortable with Doctor Who even flirting with that idea.
It probably won’t, um, consummate that idea (stupid metaphor), but I didn’t like the idea even being brought into general proximity to the programme.
15
Drew wrote at Jun 7, 08:44 am
One aspect of this story that is bothering me is something I am gleaning from River’s initial reaction to Rory turning up at her prison. I’m wondering if Rory is yet again doomed, only more permanently this time. If that’s the case, then Amy (who herself is besotted by the Doctor) will be left to raise her daughter as the future love interest of a man she herself is obsessed with. Very disturbing. Truly hope it doesn’t go that way.
16
Catriona wrote at Jun 7, 09:30 am
What was it about Rory turning up that made you think he was dead, Drew? I’m not questioning that—just didn’t get that impression myself. I would sincerely hope that Moffat et al are all over the absurdity of killing Rory in every second episode.
I sincerely doubt that Rory and Amy actually raise Melody. River’s speech to the Doctor when she arrived at Demons Run seemed to suggest the contrary.
17
Drew wrote at Jun 8, 10:07 am
Really it was just the way that River greeted him, like “oh hello, you’re my long lost dead dad.”