Options
Trying to get it all straightened out
![[Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5daf1c0ffda061f9799c3565b7f560bf.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 297 Forum Member
✭
So I know people like their theories and speculation, but I'm just trying to iron out in my mind the facts of the matter regarding River Song.
As I see it the following statements are either true or incredibly likely to be true:
1. The Doctor got River's name from looking IN the cot, not AT it, which is where the prayer leaf was. The camera looked at the side of the cot because that's where Amy (mistakenly) looked.
2. The cliff hanger isn't so much that River is Amy & Rory's daughter, it's that she is part Timelord (Human plus Timelord was the exact quote, and human plus timelord indicates partly human and partly timelord, so I'll defend my description of her as part Timelord).
3. It was the Doctor's finest hour not because he conquered a massive army, but because he conquered a massive army that had been specifically trained to kill him without shedding any blood (apart from the monks/clerics who shot each other during the misdirection).
4. Timelord is a mutation of a species, not strictly speaking a species in it's own right (although given how many there were, it may be considered as such). The Doctor is a timelord mutation of a gallifreyan, and River is therefore (presumably) a timelord mutation of a human. This implies that some parts of the Doctor's biology come from being a timelord (such as the ability to regenerate) and some come from being gallifreyan (such as having two hearts, seeing as River clearly doesn't share this trait).
5. The TARDIS is a cheeky one.
Any of the above contradicted by something that actually happened in the show?:)
As I see it the following statements are either true or incredibly likely to be true:
1. The Doctor got River's name from looking IN the cot, not AT it, which is where the prayer leaf was. The camera looked at the side of the cot because that's where Amy (mistakenly) looked.
2. The cliff hanger isn't so much that River is Amy & Rory's daughter, it's that she is part Timelord (Human plus Timelord was the exact quote, and human plus timelord indicates partly human and partly timelord, so I'll defend my description of her as part Timelord).
3. It was the Doctor's finest hour not because he conquered a massive army, but because he conquered a massive army that had been specifically trained to kill him without shedding any blood (apart from the monks/clerics who shot each other during the misdirection).
4. Timelord is a mutation of a species, not strictly speaking a species in it's own right (although given how many there were, it may be considered as such). The Doctor is a timelord mutation of a gallifreyan, and River is therefore (presumably) a timelord mutation of a human. This implies that some parts of the Doctor's biology come from being a timelord (such as the ability to regenerate) and some come from being gallifreyan (such as having two hearts, seeing as River clearly doesn't share this trait).
5. The TARDIS is a cheeky one.
Any of the above contradicted by something that actually happened in the show?:)
0
Comments
People here are divided on that but the Doctor had not been told that the cloth existed or belonged to the baby. There is nothing but conjecture that the Doctor even noticed or read the cloth - but was clearly seen reading the writing on the crib.
The "cliffhanger" is that the baby was kidnapped and needs to be rescued. The effect the DNA will have on the baby is completely unknown (by us) at this point.
It was his "finest hour" because writers wanted to use a really cool phrase. It could simply be that he fought such a large army or that he pulled-off an "impossible" rescue.
The Doctor said that you can't just cook-up a Time Lord. There has never been a definitive explanation of where any particular TimeLord attribute comes from. Where such things have been "explained", they have often be contradictory. All we can say with any degree of certainty is that Gallifreyans have two hearts and other organs are placed differenty to humans. The ability to regenerate, for example, may be something caused by the Gallifreyan environment or could be deliberately added only to certain people. If it is environmental, it maybe that it builds-up in the individual after they are born or it could have become a genetic trait that evolution has passed on - like skin colour to humans which became lighter as people migrated away from the equator and there was less sunlight and UV.
Actually Moffat answered a tweet about this and said the Doctor had been looking at the prayer leaf.
Not quite. Moffat's tweet - exactly as written - says "The didn't - it was the prayer leaf INSIDE the cot."
Unfortunately, the person he was responding to has gone and so have all of their tweets so we don't know what the question was. Where it says "The" at the begining of that post could have been meant to say "they" or "he". The question could have been "How did Amy and Rory read the name on the cot when the Tardis can't translate Galifreyan". It could have been "Why would it say River Song on the crib if the baby's name was Melody?" - Moff's answer would apply to either of those (and a 1001 others) without meaning that the baby's name wasn't written on the crib. It also doesn't refer to what the Doctor read - it may do but it's not certain.
In fact, the director's commentary on the offical BBC website refers specifically to the writing on the crib.
Well I read it at the time and it was quite clear that he meant the Doctor read her name on the prayer leaf and not from the side of the cot.
I think the reading the leaf thing is most satisfying. And makes sense because the rest of it was misdirection for the "No Luke, I am your mother" thing.
Yes - that'll be £500
For my money, the Moff's tweet clears up the thing about where the doctor was looking.
The last point is pure speculation, i suppose. But that's what I gleaned from what little was in the episode.