The Doctor wouldn’t. He’d find another way.
and the thing is Moffat is 100% right because regardless of if he called himself “The Doctor” during the Time War he was still the Doctor deep deep down and in the end he saves lives, and he saved his people
"I lack the creativity to imagine characters being forced to make difficult choices, especially since my understanding of said characters is surface-deep at best. Sometimes I think about writing real emotional consequences to things, but then I remember how much easier it would be to avoid consequences whatsoever with some bizarre winding hole-filled plot. I am a professional writer who overcomes difficulty writing a scene by shoving in a contrived loophole so I don’t have to write it. Please punch me in the face."
Old morality test: Who do you save? One thousand strangers? Or your brother? You can only choose one. Now, imagine your brother is a dick, planning to exterminate those thousand strangers, plus a million more. Now who do you choose? Oh, yeah! You do what the Doctor did, and save the whole of REALITY from the murderous ambitions of both the Daleks and the dicks in charge of Gallifrey.
Ninth Doctor, World War Three, 1x05: Because this is my life, Jackie. It’s not fun, it’s not smart, it’s just standing up and making a decision because nobody else will.
I’m getting really tired of people lambasting Moffat for making the decision that “oh, hey, yeah, maybe the Doctor shoulnd’t actually, you know, commit fucking GENOCIDE.
Yeah. Like, how dare he.
I don’t like the idea of the Doctor committing genocide any more than I like the idea of Superman breaking someone’s neck, but I think the issue here is that a lot of people found the 50th’s ‘other way’ to be, like, a bit rushed-feeling? Lazy, maybe. Extremely unsatisfying, for sure.
Is that not the thing that’s going on here, or have I misunderstood it?
At least my read from the responses here, the responses I saw the last time I saw this post going around, and the remarks I’ve seen elsewhere, is that people are mad at Moffat simply for removing the Time War angst that had been part of the series since the reboot, and then try to justify that as an ethical critique (which I find rather galling, given that I don’t see anything that justifies genocide, and I’ve disliked every time the show’s gone and done it uncritically, classic and new).
I mean, as far as personal reactions to the episode go, that’s people’s own opinions and I can’t intrude on that. But I definitely didn’t see it as rushed or lazy (the painting thing alone seriously tickled me when I first saw it), and at least for me I thought the Doctor being so close to doing what he had done all those (for him) hundreds of years ago, and being pushed by Clara to find a new way out to be immensely satisfying.
I can understand criticisms that Moffat’s resetting a status quo that’s regressive in nature (given how good the Time War was at relieving the show of a lot of excess baggage), but equally I don’t think that’s what he’s actually done, given Gallifrey’s conspicuous absence in the Capaldi series thus far. And especially when you looked at something like “Town Called Mercy”, the Time War angst was getting super old by that point in the show, so by going ahead and atoning it he’s been able to push things forward in a new direction. And I can’t fault him for that.
I think that most discussion of this misses a key aspect of Moffat’s point, which is that the problem arises when you try to depict the Time War. In an odd way, it’s a special case of one of Moffat’s standard Doctor Who tricks, which is to allude to an unseen adventure that, crucially, is usually not actually worth showing any more of than we’ve seen.
Of which the Time War is kind of the Mother of All Unseen Stories. Like, say, the Doctor’s meeting with Elizabeth I (which, while cute to see in Day of the Doctor and well done, was far better as an ambiguous gag), the concept of the Doctor being driven to the point where he commits double genocide sounds breathtaking, but it only works because we don’t have to see it. Every time we see the Doctor, he’s opposed to genocide and full of regret and horror at what he’s done. Even if he had no choice, it’s clear that he’s appalled at himself for letting the situation get to where there was no choice.
The act of trying to depict the Time War necessitates its undoing, in other words, which is the central joke of Day of the Doctor.
Past that, the only question becomes whether you find it more important to have a good technobabble explanation for how the Doctor cheats, or whether you find it more important to watch the moment when the attempt to depict the Time War breaks down.
I’d suggest that if you are in the former camp, you probably also hate the TARDIS towing the Earth home in Journey’s End, and if you are in the latter camp you recognize where the actual climaxes of both stories are, and the exact point at which they turn into parties at which everyone has had a little to much cake and a little too much wine.
*sigh* hi, welcome to goth denny’s. i’m your server, raven, you can like, sit down or something *sigh*
Sometimes you just need someone to tell you that you were brave for trying, and that you’ll be brave again. Because life is not easy, and sometimes you jump into the deep end, and you enjoy it; but eventually you have to swim back to the shallow end, getting to a place that isn’t where you wanted to be. Yet, perhaps you weren’t meant for that pool, maybe it was just training for something bigger, maybe you were getting ready for the ocean; the water that you were always meant to dive into.
T.B. LaBerge (via c-isnenegro)
My experience of life is that it is not divided up into genres; it’s a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you’re lucky.
Alan Moore (via feellng)