I am going to follow the links you posted tomorrow once I've had some sleep and am thinking properly. In the meantime, I'll try to answer some of your questions. (With some seriously unhelpful answers.)
that ridiculous bassinet. Why would the Doctor say it was his? How would it have River's name on it while still being excessively old?
I wondered that, too. I thought, 'why is the Doctor all surprised at River's identity when he's had her cot in the TARDIS attic for God knows how long!' Here's my fanwank-y answer: It was his cot. His child/children also slept in it, which is why he gets all emotional when Amy asks who it belonged to. He only stenciled River's name on it recently as a gift for Amy. And only when River draws attention to it does he realize how "Melody Pond" translates to "River Song."
WTF do the headless monks have to do with anything?
IDEK, but wasn't it cool when we saw their headless neck stumps with the skin all twisted and tied like a helium balloon?!?
Does Moffat just have a thing for inventing enemies?
( ... )
You know what I really don't get about the translation, though? I'm sure the Time Lords had a word for pond. And probably melody as well. So unless he was reading it in every language possible (or because of the TARDIS they were all thinking and speaking in the forest language? Idek
( ... )
Oh, to clarify: I think it says "Melody Pond" in Gallifreyan on the cot, because of course the Time Lords would have a word for both 'Melody' and 'Pond' and naturally that's what the Doctor would have written if he had intended it as a gift for Amy's baby. It's only when River says "I am telling you" that he realizes how "Melody Pond" might translate to "River Song".
At least, I think that must be what was going on. Because otherwise: why would he have a very old cot lying around with either "Melody Pond" or "River Song" written on it? (And am I the only one who thought that was a really creepy-ass cradle? The thing did not look like it would adhere to any sort of modern safety standards. If I were Amy, I'd probably demand to know why the Doctor were trying to place my child in what was obviously the Time Lord equivalent of a lead paint-covered antique death trap--complete with pointy metal stars for the baby to swallow when she's older
( ... )
I've seen people who think the Doctor's real name is on the cot (but that contradicts the whole 'there's only one way you could've found that out'... unless by 'only one way' he means 'you've seen my deathtrap cradle')... But I'm confused about how River's name got on there at all, since the Doctor didn't know its name when Rory brought the baby to Amy. Timey-wimey, for sure, but something is definitely up there.
The cradle is more about ensuring a sort of Time Lord Darwinism. If you don't eat the stars, you live. If you eat the stars and live, close enough. I suspect if it was the Doctor's it probably used to have a lot more stars.The regeneration bit was what I wanted to check (there are massive gaps I don't remember from season 4, which is a shame. I need to fix that.) I suspected that was the case, since otherwise everyone would be all "OMG SHE COULD'VE REGENERATED AT THE END OF SitL!!!!1" right now. Actually, I'm surprised they're not anyway
( ... )
Comments 6
that ridiculous bassinet. Why would the Doctor say it was his? How would it have River's name on it while still being excessively old?
I wondered that, too. I thought, 'why is the Doctor all surprised at River's identity when he's had her cot in the TARDIS attic for God knows how long!' Here's my fanwank-y answer: It was his cot. His child/children also slept in it, which is why he gets all emotional when Amy asks who it belonged to. He only stenciled River's name on it recently as a gift for Amy. And only when River draws attention to it does he realize how "Melody Pond" translates to "River Song."
WTF do the headless monks have to do with anything?
IDEK, but wasn't it cool when we saw their headless neck stumps with the skin all twisted and tied like a helium balloon?!?
Does Moffat just have a thing for inventing enemies? ( ... )
Reply
Reply
At least, I think that must be what was going on. Because otherwise: why would he have a very old cot lying around with either "Melody Pond" or "River Song" written on it? (And am I the only one who thought that was a really creepy-ass cradle? The thing did not look like it would adhere to any sort of modern safety standards. If I were Amy, I'd probably demand to know why the Doctor were trying to place my child in what was obviously the Time Lord equivalent of a lead paint-covered antique death trap--complete with pointy metal stars for the baby to swallow when she's older ( ... )
Reply
The cradle is more about ensuring a sort of Time Lord Darwinism. If you don't eat the stars, you live. If you eat the stars and live, close enough. I suspect if it was the Doctor's it probably used to have a lot more stars.The regeneration bit was what I wanted to check (there are massive gaps I don't remember from season 4, which is a shame. I need to fix that.) I suspected that was the case, since otherwise everyone would be all "OMG SHE COULD'VE REGENERATED AT THE END OF SitL!!!!1" right now. Actually, I'm surprised they're not anyway ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment