Re: From the Archives .....

On 28/04/2024 16:15, The Last Doctor wrote:

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

The True Doctor wrote:
>

On 27/04/2024 08:57, Blueshirt wrote:

The True Doctor wrote:

>
Where's Doctor Ruth among the faces of the Doctor? She's
not there because there's no Doctor Ruth. The Doctor's
regenerations begin at Hartnell. Where's Ruth's before his
face? It's not there because all the faces after Hartnell
are those of Morbius, and Hartnell is declared as the
beginning of the Doctor, not Ruth.

>
Ah c'mon Aggy at least try and be serious. How can the face
of a woman from a 2020 episode of Doctor Who be featured in
an episode of Doctor Who from 1976 when the idea hadn't even
been thought of?

>
How can an abused child from another dimension that was turned
into a monster possibly be the predecessor of Hartnell when
the idea wasn't thought of until 2018?

>
Fiction my boy, it's fiction about a time travelling alien... so
outside of the real world a writer can write any scenario he
wants to in retrospect if he thinks it's good for telling the
story he wants to tell. You don't have to like it, believe it,
or think it makes sense. Chris Chibnall doesn't care if his
ideas don't fit your idea of Doctor Who, or mine even. But it's
what he chose to do.

 Insisting that an idea that wasn’t thought of fifty years earlier can’t
change the course of the show is a bit bonkers anyway.

Any new idea added to any existing literature cannot change previous established facts, especially by requiring the reader/viewer to reject everything they already know. War of the Daleks was universally derided by this group for doing that, and The Timeless Children shares the same fate.
Human viewers and readers, even children, cannot not be presumed to be the same as stupid animals residing on Animal Farm that will believe anything Squealer tells them despite seeing and knowing that what Squealer claims is a lie.

 Where was Aggie’s complaint when The Deadly Assassin made a lie of the
Second Doctor’s statement that his people could live forever?
 

The Deadly Assassin doesn't change that. In fact it fundamental plot was designed to illustrate that Time Lords could live forever, but at the expense of destroying the whole of Gallifrey in order to obtain unlimited amounts of power. The same goes for The Keeper of Traken.

Where was Aggie’s complaint when Utopia made a lie  of the Deadly
Assassin’s assertion that for Time Lords, twelve regenerations was “the
end”? (Before that, the Master’s continuing existence was due to body

It was the end unless there was external intervention as in The Deadly Assassin and in The Five Doctor's where the Time Lords offered the Master a new cycle of 12 regenerations.

stealing - but Yana was a reincarnation of the Master - with all the
memories of his previous incarnations (once the watch was opened).
 

And the Doctor states long before that that the Time Lords not only brought back the Master from the dead but also Rassilon from the dead, and this was all made possible by their memories being held in the Matrix as established in The Deadly Assassin and reinforced in Dark Water/Death in Heaven.

Where was Aggie’s complaint when The Pyramids of Mars explicitly made a lie
of the Doctor’s statement in the Aztecs that “you can't rewrite history!
Not one line!”?

Inferno and Day of the Daleks already demonstrated the conception of parallel worlds with parallel histories long before Pyramids of Mars. Pyramids of Mars reinforces that conception and in fact every single episode of Doctor Who since the very first episode requires parallel histories to exist otherwise there would be no stake of life and death involved for any of the historical figures involved. What Hartnell says in the Aztecs is either out of ignorance or a lie, and lying is part of the Doctor's established character since he's not Superman. Hartnell doesn't even know what Daleks even are before The Daleks.

 Seems to me that the show is allowed to retcon anything as long as Aggie
approves of the change, but if he doesn’t he’ll resort to all sort of
ridiculous nonsense to claim that the change is impossible.
 

And guess what? RTD is going to write his own scenarios in the
next few years and he won't care if you don't like them either!
>

It's quite simple, read slowly if it helps. In 1976 a Doctor
Who producer had an idea, forty plus years later another
Doctor Who producer had a different idea. It's all fiction
at the end of

>
Fiction has to make sense in order to be believed. Where is
the face of Doctor Ruth if she came directly before Hartnell
according to Chibnall and Big Finish? The least Chibnall could
have done is chosen a white male actor to play the Timeless
Child monster if he claims it was one of the faces shown in
The Brain of Morbius.

>
I'm not sure she was 'directly' before Hartnell... the term
pre-Hartnell could mean anything if we assume there was a whole
cycle of regenerations that were wiped from the memory of the
First Doctor. I have no desire to re-watch those episodes at the
moment but I don't think it was ever stated that Ruth was the
incarnation just before Hartnell... and with a blue Police Box
being her TARDIS I'm not even sure how she could get that if she
was pre-Hartnell. (But that's a different discussion!)

 There’s nothing except Aggie’s desire to make it so that says the Fugitive
Doctor immediately precedes Hartnell. But even if there was - in the middle
of the sequence where the Doctor’s faces are flashing up in Morbius,
there’s a short cut away to show the Doctor’s concentration and Sarah
Jane’s concern. Enough to add a face or two that we never saw at the time.
 

There is no suggestion that any of the unrecognized faces we see in The Brain of Morbius are those of the Doctor. Everything we are shown and told in both the TV episodes and novelization makes it absolutely clear that those are the faces of Morbius. If they were the faces of the Doctor then why doesn't the Doctor look surprised since it has already been established since Power of the Daleks that he'd never regenerated before Hartnell.
Morbius asks the Doctor how long has he lived when he gets to Hartnell since he and the viewer both know from established continuity that's all the minds the Doctor can draw upon and then tells the Doctor that he can't resist the power of Morbius when his own faces start appearing on the screen. This indicates that the unrecognised faces are those of Morbius. Morbius wants the Doctor to go back to his beginning, basically a newly fertilized embryo, but the Doctor holds on until the apparatus blows up on the side of Morbius indicating he has lost the game and then he runs away.
Based on unchallengeable continuity and the like go back to your beginning the unknown faces could be the Doctors father, grand father, and other ancestors which he remembers. Maybe there could have been Gallifreyan primates, amphibians, fish, sharks, and single celled organisms shown if it continued.

As to the police box TARDIS - there are at least two reasonable
possibilities in the context of the narrative.
 1) the TARDIS wasn’t a Police Box when the Fugitive Doctor buried it. But
the TARDIS recognised Jodie when she approached and chose to assume the
form she would recognise so that she’d know this was HER TARDIS straight
away. This does require a high degree of sapience on the part of the TARDIS
but some stories have previously suggested that.
 

Unless it is explicitly stated by the writer then it isn't valid if it attempts to negate existing canon. Don't you understand that Squealer?

2) the TARDIS has had a tendency to assume a Police Box form for a very
long time, especially when visiting Earth. Maybe this is one of the issues
that had it in a repair shop when Clara told Hartnell to steal it - knowing
as she did that it was already very much HIS TARDIS. So the problem
observed by Susan and her grandfather in The Cave of Skulls wasn’t a new
one - it was a recurrence of an existing foible that the Doctor had
forgotten about.

Yet another deranged conspiracy theory asking the viewer to reject existing canon. We are told that the TARDIS adopted the shape of a Police Box because that was a kind of camouflage to fit in with its surroundings. And then the Camelon Circuit broke. There is no evidence or explanation provided by the writer that the TARDIS had ever been a Police Box before.

 

the day but expecting Phillip Hinchcliffe to know in 1976
what Chris Chibnall was going to do in 2020 is not a rational
argument.

>
Stop being stupid. You're just as bad a Squealer. Chibnall
knew what Hinchcliffe did in 1976 so why didn't he choose to
subvert it?

 Interesting slip of the pen by Aggie there - Chibnall indeed didn’t subvert

I meant "so why did he choose to subvert it?"

what Hinchcliffe had orchestrated in the Brain of Morbius - he embraced it

He dissembled it like Squealer.

and came up with a way of making it true while keeping the rest of the
pointers we have had down the decades also true - from a certain point of

No. Making his lies true means that the viewer has to reject EVERYTHING they know about the character of the Doctor that has been established in hundreds of episodes that came before The Timeless Children.

view. It’s a Sixth Sense or Usual Suspects kind of reveal - (and no, I
don’t think it was as clever or as well done as either of those examples) -

It's pure bullshit invented by a degenerate retard that despised everything about Doctor Who and doesn't understand the basics of story telling.

that what we have always believed was not quite the true situation.
 

None of these series ran for over 50 years and completely destroyed the character of the main protagonist.

>
Obviously Chris Chibnall liked the idea. Maybe he always had
done and was just waiting for his chance to build upon it?
Clearly if he didn't like the idea of pre-Hartnell incarnations
he wouldn't have came up with his own version of the idea.
>
That's my logical interpretation anyway. Oink Oink.
 

A sixty year old TV show contains layers, and each producer
adds different layers to a show's lore at different times.
You don't have to like it, but that's how it is.

>
There were no incarnations of the Doctor before Hartnell
period. Proof is by contradiction. Either the unknown faces
are those of Morbius, or one of them should be a fat black
woman that is shown immediately after Hartnell's face. She
isn't therefore there are no incarnations of the Doctor before
Hartnell.

 Here Aggie is using two invalid arguments and trying to finesse things so
you don’t notice:
 1) Aggie is claiming that Chibnall placed the Fugitive immediately before
Hartnell. There’s no evidence for that.

Chibnall said it himself and so did Big Finish when they started makign Fugitive Doctor audio adventures.

 2) Aggie is claiming that if this is the case, then a “fat black woman”
should appear in the Morbius sequence. No reason why that should be true,

The fat black woman should have been shown immediately after Hartnell was show, cutaway or not, if she was intended to be his predecessor. Instead a whole bunch of white males are shown.

we can’t expect a 100% concordance with every tiny element of the history

Yes we can. This is what a good writer will do not a writer of shit who wants to totally destroy a show he despises so he can get his retarded sexist and racist message across to the fans saying that he hates and despises them for being normal.

of the show. Otherwise the show would have imploded the second time
Atlantis was destroyed.
 

The show already imploded. Whittaker lost 3/4 of the shows viewers thanks to the Timeless Child monster and Tennant and Gatwa have failed to get even half of them back.
Doctor Who is DEAD!
--
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it stands for." -William Shatner