![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Meta: Clara Who?
Welcome back to the meta café. It's been a while, since for some reason my brain's not been engaging with meta since about Christmas. However, recently Clara has been demanding my attention, so here is a rather brief overview of some of my thoughts. I've made subheadings in an attempt at introducing some order. It still feels scattered though, because there is so much there and it's a little like trying to illustrate Captain Jack's 20th Century timelines...
ETA: Oh and as per usual half of this (at least) is![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
promethia_tenk's, as we share a brain.
Clara Who?
Puppet Master
There is someone pulling strings, and he/she/it has been doing so for a long time. Remember, we still don’t know who or what made the TARDIS explode, or why. It is something above and beyond the Silence (the religious order), although the Silence is (presumably) another one of its puppets. So, lets look at what new information we have...
In the prequel for ‘Asylum’ we see a mysterious cloaked and hooded figure invade the Doctor’s dreams and send him a message ‘from Darla von Karlson’. This is important on several levels.
- The figure controls the Doctor’s dreams, refusing to let him wake up until the Doctor bends to his wishes.
- The figure uses Gallifreyan writing/maps to tell the Doctor where to go.
- The figure tells him to go to Skaro, the very name of which the Doctor will not pronounce, until forced.
- It’s all a trap, set up so that the Daleks can capture him.
- And all of this is set in motion so the Doctor can meet Oswin...
I re-watched ‘Asylum of the Daleks’ the other day, and there’s no doubt about it - the asylum is impenetrable. The Alaska couldn’t have crashed, it is literally impossible.
Which means that it was all rigged.
And as I very much doubt that the hooded figure was particularly interested in blowing up the asylum - or fixing the Pond’s marriage - Oswin stands as the only plausible explanation of why the Doctor needed to go there. Possibly the hooded figure also wanted Oswin to delete the Dalek’s knowledge of the Doctor, but that’s not something we can be sure of... What we know is that a) Oswin was put there deliberately and b) the Doctor was sent there in order to meet her.
We also know that c) Mysterious hooded figure is out to get the Doctor in some way or other, but not why.
(Aside: Plz be either Omega or the Valeyard? Please Santa Moff?)
So, what does this mean? Well... we don’t know. Except that Clara Oswin Oswald is important, and that she is something to do with the hooded figure. And there is this wonderful line from the BBCA trailer:
Doctor: "I look at you every single day and I don't understand a single thing about you!"
Is she just a clone, duplicated across time and space? How many are there of her? And more importantly - what is she?
Eggs
Clearly all of her are more or less identical, although she adapts to her environment. Oswin was tech-savvy and confident, whereas Victorian Clara was changing to suit her environment and very insightful about people. But she’s obviously the same girl - she likes making soufflés, is exceedingly clever, and has those lines: ‘Run you clever boy - and remember’ programmed...
I’m using the word ‘programmed’ deliberately, because I suspect that Oswin might be a thing. Quite probably some kind of egg due to all the egg imagery - certainly something more on the ‘thing’ spectrum than the ‘person’ spectrum. (Unless she was originally one girl, duplicated. The two are not mutually exclusive.)
However, since last season we had a girl who was turned into a weapon (and never quite regained her all of her humanity), it would make sense to go the other way - turn a thing (possibly a weapon) into a person. After all, the line between ‘thing’ and ‘person’ has always been porous in DW - just look at the TARDIS for the best example.
Also remember that Oswin won the day because she refused to let the Daleks overpower her humanity. Whatever she was, she has become ‘real’ to an extent that might not have been foreseen by whoever created her.
Incidentally if she’s an egg, I’m guessing she’s a Gallifreyan egg. Partly because, as just mentioned, we have a precedent with the TARDIS, but also since this is the anniversary and there should be a fair bit of ‘going back to the beginning’ around. Besides, the mysterious figure wrote Gallifreyan and she is so cleverly constructed that the Doctor can't understand her. (Doctor: "I look at you every single day and I don't understand a single thing about you!")
But if she is an egg, what does she hatch into? (I say ‘egg’, but it might as well be ‘key’.) Whether she hatches, or unlocks something, she was created for a purpose. And we are being told in no uncertain terms that Clara is this season’s mystery. Could it be to do with Gallifrey?
However, if she is a thing, a 'constructed' person, how ‘real’ can she be? Well, we’ve got a precedent! (With many thanks toflowsoffire for making my head create the connection.)
From Forest of the Dead:
Donna’s children live. Created from nothing, through Donna (and Lee’s) love, they gained independent existence to such an extent that CAL was able to bring them back from never-having-been and make them ‘real’.
(Sidebar: I love the fact that the Doctor’s wife, in her afterlife, is looking after Donna’s children - and they can hear all the stories about how amazing their mother was, how she was the most important woman in the whole wide universe, and how there are people living in the light, singing songs of Donna Noble, a thousand million light-years away who will never forget her. Donna who can never remember, who has to live as so much less than she was, has children who will live forever, and will never forget.)
And remember...
Since all the Claras are one Clara (I’m taking this as a basic truth), I am presuming that she will need to remember all the others in order to access whatever power is locked away/become herself fully.
As the Doctor said: “Nothing is ever forgotten, not completely. And if something can be remembered, it can come back...”
And as we know, that goes for people too.
We have already seen how important it was for the Doctor to remember Oswin, and connect her to Victorian!Clara, in order to go looking for a Clara who was still alive.
Which is where the adorable little prequel fits on so perfectly it hurts - the whole conversation turns around trying to find things that have been lost through the power of memory.
Amy remembered the Doctor back into existence - what will happen when Clara remembers? And why is it so important that the Doctor remembers? And what does he need to remember?
Memory also played a great role in The Snowmen (snow that remembered; the memory worm; Dr Simon who forgot his whole life...), not to mention how the Doctor has been busy erasing himself from the universe, making everyone forget.
And of course, the Library is full of people forgetting and remembering, hiding and being found, and people's names being the key to everything...
(I've seen several people speculate that Clara is CAL due to the likeness. I think the chances of that being the case are 0%. Pay attention to the names...)
Clara Who?
‘If name makes meaning, as ‘tis said to make!’
The Divine Comedy, Paradiso, Canto XII, l. 81
From the notes to Canto XII of Paradiso:
I think we can safely say that this Platonic Doctrine is one that Moffat adheres to...
Clara: Feminine form of the Late Latin name Clarus which meant "clear, bright, famous".
Oswin: A boy's name of Old English origin. The meaning of Oswin is "God's friend".
Oswald: Divine power, rule of god. Derived from the Old English elements ‘os’ "god" and ‘weald’ "rule".
For more on this, please see My Oswin theory. I don’t know that the basic theory is correct, but there’s still lots of stuff there that’s relevant. Clara isn't CAL, but I am sure that there are/will be plenty of parallels/thematic relevances. (Oh that line about family.) And I look forward to diving into it all. :)
Also you should all go readpurplefringe's Incoherent meta ramblings, which are not incoherent at all. Indeed they are fabulous and clever and deep and touch on lots of stuff I meant to talk about, but couldn't fit in this time round.
ETA: Oh and as per usual half of this (at least) is
promethia_tenk's, as we share a brain. Clara Who?
Puppet Master
There is someone pulling strings, and he/she/it has been doing so for a long time. Remember, we still don’t know who or what made the TARDIS explode, or why. It is something above and beyond the Silence (the religious order), although the Silence is (presumably) another one of its puppets. So, lets look at what new information we have...
In the prequel for ‘Asylum’ we see a mysterious cloaked and hooded figure invade the Doctor’s dreams and send him a message ‘from Darla von Karlson’. This is important on several levels.
- The figure controls the Doctor’s dreams, refusing to let him wake up until the Doctor bends to his wishes.
- The figure uses Gallifreyan writing/maps to tell the Doctor where to go.
- The figure tells him to go to Skaro, the very name of which the Doctor will not pronounce, until forced.
- It’s all a trap, set up so that the Daleks can capture him.
- And all of this is set in motion so the Doctor can meet Oswin...
I re-watched ‘Asylum of the Daleks’ the other day, and there’s no doubt about it - the asylum is impenetrable. The Alaska couldn’t have crashed, it is literally impossible.
Which means that it was all rigged.
And as I very much doubt that the hooded figure was particularly interested in blowing up the asylum - or fixing the Pond’s marriage - Oswin stands as the only plausible explanation of why the Doctor needed to go there. Possibly the hooded figure also wanted Oswin to delete the Dalek’s knowledge of the Doctor, but that’s not something we can be sure of... What we know is that a) Oswin was put there deliberately and b) the Doctor was sent there in order to meet her.
We also know that c) Mysterious hooded figure is out to get the Doctor in some way or other, but not why.
(Aside: Plz be either Omega or the Valeyard? Please Santa Moff?)
So, what does this mean? Well... we don’t know. Except that Clara Oswin Oswald is important, and that she is something to do with the hooded figure. And there is this wonderful line from the BBCA trailer:
Doctor: "I look at you every single day and I don't understand a single thing about you!"
Is she just a clone, duplicated across time and space? How many are there of her? And more importantly - what is she?
Doctor: When you find something brand new in the world, something you've never seen before, what's the next thing you look for?
STRAX:
A grenade?
DOCTOR:
A prophet.
Eggs
Clearly all of her are more or less identical, although she adapts to her environment. Oswin was tech-savvy and confident, whereas Victorian Clara was changing to suit her environment and very insightful about people. But she’s obviously the same girl - she likes making soufflés, is exceedingly clever, and has those lines: ‘Run you clever boy - and remember’ programmed...
I’m using the word ‘programmed’ deliberately, because I suspect that Oswin might be a thing. Quite probably some kind of egg due to all the egg imagery - certainly something more on the ‘thing’ spectrum than the ‘person’ spectrum. (Unless she was originally one girl, duplicated. The two are not mutually exclusive.)
However, since last season we had a girl who was turned into a weapon (and never quite regained her all of her humanity), it would make sense to go the other way - turn a thing (possibly a weapon) into a person. After all, the line between ‘thing’ and ‘person’ has always been porous in DW - just look at the TARDIS for the best example.
Also remember that Oswin won the day because she refused to let the Daleks overpower her humanity. Whatever she was, she has become ‘real’ to an extent that might not have been foreseen by whoever created her.
Incidentally if she’s an egg, I’m guessing she’s a Gallifreyan egg. Partly because, as just mentioned, we have a precedent with the TARDIS, but also since this is the anniversary and there should be a fair bit of ‘going back to the beginning’ around. Besides, the mysterious figure wrote Gallifreyan and she is so cleverly constructed that the Doctor can't understand her. (Doctor: "I look at you every single day and I don't understand a single thing about you!")
But if she is an egg, what does she hatch into? (I say ‘egg’, but it might as well be ‘key’.) Whether she hatches, or unlocks something, she was created for a purpose. And we are being told in no uncertain terms that Clara is this season’s mystery. Could it be to do with Gallifrey?
However, if she is a thing, a 'constructed' person, how ‘real’ can she be? Well, we’ve got a precedent! (With many thanks to
flowsoffire for making my head create the connection.) From Forest of the Dead:
DONNA
Well, what about the children? The children aren't dead. My children aren't dead.
MISS EVANGELISTA
Your children were never alive.
DONNA
Don't you say that. Don't you dare say that about my children!
MISS EVANGELISTA
Look at your children. Look at all of them, really look.
The camera shows several children on the playground: all wearing identical clothes, all looking the same, exactly like Donna's children.
MISS EVANGELISTA
They're not real. Do you see it now? They're all the same. All the children of this world, the same boy and the same girl, over and over again.
[...]
DONNA
Where are we? Why are the children all the same?
MISS EVANGELISTA
The same pattern over and over. It saves an awful lot of space.
[...]
DONNA
If this is all a dream... whose dream is it?
MISS EVANGELISTA
She's not real. They're fictions. I'm sorry, but now that you understand that, you won't be able to keep a hold. They are sustained only by your belief.
[...]
RIVER (VO)
Now and then, every once in a very long while, every day in a million days, when the wind stands fair, and the Doctor comes to call... everybody lives.
Cut: River closes the TARDIS book. She gives a goodnight kiss to the Girl [CAL], who is now in the third bed in the children's room, beside Donna's kids Ella and Joshua.
RIVER
Sweet dreams, everyone.
She switches off the lights and the screen goes black.
Donna’s children live. Created from nothing, through Donna (and Lee’s) love, they gained independent existence to such an extent that CAL was able to bring them back from never-having-been and make them ‘real’.
(Sidebar: I love the fact that the Doctor’s wife, in her afterlife, is looking after Donna’s children - and they can hear all the stories about how amazing their mother was, how she was the most important woman in the whole wide universe, and how there are people living in the light, singing songs of Donna Noble, a thousand million light-years away who will never forget her. Donna who can never remember, who has to live as so much less than she was, has children who will live forever, and will never forget.)
And remember...
Since all the Claras are one Clara (I’m taking this as a basic truth), I am presuming that she will need to remember all the others in order to access whatever power is locked away/become herself fully.
As the Doctor said: “Nothing is ever forgotten, not completely. And if something can be remembered, it can come back...”
And as we know, that goes for people too.
We have already seen how important it was for the Doctor to remember Oswin, and connect her to Victorian!Clara, in order to go looking for a Clara who was still alive.
Which is where the adorable little prequel fits on so perfectly it hurts - the whole conversation turns around trying to find things that have been lost through the power of memory.
Amy remembered the Doctor back into existence - what will happen when Clara remembers? And why is it so important that the Doctor remembers? And what does he need to remember?
Memory also played a great role in The Snowmen (snow that remembered; the memory worm; Dr Simon who forgot his whole life...), not to mention how the Doctor has been busy erasing himself from the universe, making everyone forget.
And of course, the Library is full of people forgetting and remembering, hiding and being found, and people's names being the key to everything...
DOCTOR
CAL is a child! A child hooked up to a mainframe? Why didn't you tell me this? I needed to know this!
MR LUX
Because she's family! CAL... Charlotte Abigail Lux. My grandfather's youngest daughter.
(I've seen several people speculate that Clara is CAL due to the likeness. I think the chances of that being the case are 0%. Pay attention to the names...)
Clara Who?
‘If name makes meaning, as ‘tis said to make!’
The Divine Comedy, Paradiso, Canto XII, l. 81
From the notes to Canto XII of Paradiso:
The Plantonic doctrine that the inherent quality of things issued in their names, current among mediaeval philosophers and grammarians, is reflected in Dante’s Vita Nuova, where he quotes the formula “nomina sunt consequentia rerum” (“names are the consequences of things”).
I think we can safely say that this Platonic Doctrine is one that Moffat adheres to...
Clara: Feminine form of the Late Latin name Clarus which meant "clear, bright, famous".
Oswin: A boy's name of Old English origin. The meaning of Oswin is "God's friend".
Oswald: Divine power, rule of god. Derived from the Old English elements ‘os’ "god" and ‘weald’ "rule".
For more on this, please see My Oswin theory. I don’t know that the basic theory is correct, but there’s still lots of stuff there that’s relevant. Clara isn't CAL, but I am sure that there are/will be plenty of parallels/thematic relevances. (Oh that line about family.) And I look forward to diving into it all. :)
Also you should all go read
purplefringe's Incoherent meta ramblings, which are not incoherent at all. Indeed they are fabulous and clever and deep and touch on lots of stuff I meant to talk about, but couldn't fit in this time round.
no subject
Wonderful, as ever. I'm glad you mentioned the turning-a-weapon-into-a-person thing, because that's been one of my theories for a long time, and it's very pleasing when people as meta-savvy as you have the same idea! It's particuarly pleasing when they manage to phrase it much more eloquently and convincingly than I ever can :-) I think this is particularly important for the Doctor's arc too - in helping to turn someone from a weapon/a 'thing'/ a program into a 'real' person, it will also help to turn back from being a 'Great Warrior' into a healer....
LOVE the puppet-master section. I'd forgotten about that prequel! You tie everything together very well, and I'm sure you must be right about an overarching string-puller who brought the Doctor there to meet Oswin...my theory is still that it's all to do with the rebirth of Gallifrey, and the 'big bang' of the mysterious Tardis explosion is somehow going to link into the recreation of the Time Lords' home planet. But I could be wrong.
On the subject of creation, and also names - whilst I agree that Oswin and CAL are VERY unlikely to be connected, there is actually a connection in their names. Lux?
Finally - 'Donna who can never remember, who has to live as so much less than she was, has children who will live forever, and will never forget.' <3333333 PERFECT.
no subject
<3 I think you cover a lot of this in your giant post (have only skimmed it so far, sorry), but knew you were waiting. Am glad I managed to actually get something posted before the new episode aired!
Wonderful, as ever. I'm glad you mentioned the turning-a-weapon-into-a-person thing, because that's been one of my theories for a long time, and it's very pleasing when people as meta-savvy as you have the same idea! It's particuarly pleasing when they manage to phrase it much more eloquently and convincingly than I ever can :-)
Great minds think alike!
I think this is particularly important for the Doctor's arc too - in helping to turn someone from a weapon/a 'thing'/ a program into a 'real' person, it will also help to turn back from being a 'Great Warrior' into a healer....
Promethia talked about how this is a nice development, turning from the very inward-looking Pond era, to a more outward looking phase. Oswin saved them by her humanity, not by any attachment she had to anyone. As you say, this is important for his arc.
LOVE the puppet-master section. I'd forgotten about that prequel! You tie everything together very well, and I'm sure you must be right about an overarching string-puller who brought the Doctor there to meet Oswin...
It's one of the over-arcing themes of S7, actually, but I ran out of time. Will probably touch on it in later meta though. (Puppets, I mean. 7A was full of puppets.)
my theory is still that it's all to do with the rebirth of Gallifrey, and the 'big bang' of the mysterious Tardis explosion is somehow going to link into the recreation of the Time Lords' home planet. But I could be wrong.
If not the rebirth, then then SOMETHING to do with Gallifrey. *pokes* Doctor Who? Is it his name, is it something else? What secrets does he carry?
On the subject of creation, and also names - whilst I agree that Oswin and CAL are VERY unlikely to be connected, there is actually a connection in their names. Lux?
Ooooh, VERY neat. Yes. (Everything ties back to the Library, but thematically, not literally. The Library is a Fixed Point within the narrative. It cannot be altered, or everything falls to pieces.)
Finally - 'Donna who can never remember, who has to live as so much less than she was, has children who will live forever, and will never forget.' <3333333 PERFECT.
This is why I love meta - it came to me as I was writing. <3
no subject
If you're right--wow, that would be incredible (not to mention Moff playing the longest game in the history of the series, considering the threads go right back to season five and even "End of Time"--which was what, 2010?). All building maybe toward the 50th anniversary special? Be interesting to see if Santa Moff can pull it all together.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I'm actually more interesting in the (I hope! I hope!) possible Valeyard. I like ties to classic who!
no subject
Mystery and intrigue! \o/
I hadn't heard the Clara is Cal theory, and I'm intrigued. It's Moffat so I kinda doubt it, but intrigued non the less!
I think it's pretty obvious Clara is herself (back during S5 there were theories that River was Amy... or Romana or the Rani or the TARDIS etc etc), but that doesn't mean the Library isn't important!
I'm actually more interesting in the (I hope! I hope!) possible Valeyard. I like ties to classic who!
I lean more towards Omega. Partly because he is (or was) genuinely nuts, and would have the ability & motive to blow up the universe, and also because all the religious soldiers the Silence employs (both in the Angels ep, and in AGMGTW) have an Ω on their uniforms... *flails at possible ties to Old!Who*
no subject
Also good catch with all the themeatic stuff. Love it!
More later; my boss is at large.
no subject
It's cut down, because I wanted it posted before Saturday. There is TOO MUCH THERE. /o\ But this is more than enough, to be honest...
I must be dense because I didn't pick up the contradiction that if the Asylum was inpenatrable, the Alaska should never have crashed there (would presumably have exploded over the planet).
It's sort of hidden in plain sight? I'm not sure the Doctor even works it out, not properly.
And the hooded figure writing in Gallifreyan and refusing to let the Doctor wake up until he'd agreed to go to Skaro--yes, it wouldn't surprise me if this figure somehow returns by the end of 7.2.
I am totally presuming that the hooded figure was also the one saying 'Silence Will Fall' in The Pandorica Opens, just before the TARDIS blew up. Different voice, yes, but the hooded figure is some sort of projection after all. Basically: EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED.
Also good catch with all the themeatic stuff. Love it!
There is more, but I'm not up to capturing it. But puppets are definitely a thing, and will return for 7B I'm sure of it!
More later; my boss is at large.
See you then! Bosses can be tricky...
no subject
I come away with two thoughts...Is Clara a replacement weapon for Melody/River, the weapon that technically failed?
Or is Clara a key, like Dawn, THE key?
(And I love the fact that Clara is a much prettier name with the British pronunciation, than the American.)
no subject
I've missed YOU! Seems forever since I've 'seen' you. OTOH I've been busy... (And thank you. <3)
I come away with two thoughts...Is Clara a replacement weapon for Melody/River, the weapon that technically failed?
See that's the thing, I'm not sure. Something's out to kill the Doctor, and blow up the universe... But because of timey-wimey-ness it's complicated. However, as Promethia pointed out, TBB can be seen as a very specific attack on River. Her husband gets locked up, her father has been erased (and is now made of plastic), and he then proceeds to kill her mother. And River herself is trapped in the exploding TARDIS, which blows up on the night on which she is conceived. If she's a failed weapon, then someone is very, very keen to get rid of her... As keen as they were to kill the Doctor by creating a Fixed Point. Oh there is a LOT of pulling strings. So yes, Clara could definitely be attempt #2!
Or is Clara a key, like Dawn, THE key?
Could be both (River was both wife AND killer, after all), but the whole thing hinges on WHAT DOES SHE OPEN/UNLOCK? Is she an egg? Will she hatch a new Gallifrey? *poke poke poke* (Oswin was listening to Carmen: 'Si je t'aime, prends garde à toi!' <- I'm sure this means she's dangerous in some way or another.)
(And I love the fact that Clara is a much prettier name with the British pronunciation, than the American.)
Clara is *such* a pretty name, I almost wish I'd called one of my daughters Clara. Except it wouldn't fit any of them. *g*
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Maybe Clara's been designed as a weapon to crush the Doctor's spirit. The companion who keeps coming back over and over again and who *must* die over and over again to save the world.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
*Saves to contemplate later*
no subject
no subject
This is torture, it looks so delicious.
no subject
Oh I know THAT feeling! Enjoy once you are able! <3
no subject
*scrunches face* Mind you, I do think money is a particularly boring motivation. So I would kinda prefer if that wasn't what was going on here. But it would take care of that weird line. Plus all those references to "collectors" and "debts."
ETA2: Another line that has always kinda nagged at me: A Time Lord's body is a miracle, even a dead one. There are whole empires out there that would tear this world apart for a single cell. I mean, I know she's covering there so they can dispose of the Tessellecta, but what she's suggesting doesn't quite line up with, say, the Silence's motivation for getting their hands on her--they just seemed to want a good way to get the Doctor dead.
Yay, you wrote something \o/ 'Tis well and good.
ETA: Re: the idea of Clara being a weapon who could become human. I'm not sure if that's holding up? I mean, she wasn't born a Dalek, she became one (resisting every step of the way). And Victorian Clara didn't seem to have anything weapon-y about her--quite the opposite. Unless she's secretly a bomb or something.
Which isn't to say that she can't be a thing of some kind.
no subject
Mmmmm, Jekyll. ♥ Mind you, I'm not sure 'profit' should be read as 'money'. Simeon doesn't want money, he wants to destroy the world. I read profit more as 'this has been created for a reason': Clara is most definitely something new, and she didn't get there by chance, she was designed.
I mean, I know she's covering there so they can dispose of the Tessellecta, but what she's suggesting doesn't quite line up with, say, the Silence's motivation for getting their hands on her--they just seemed to want a good way to get the Doctor dead.
It always made me think of Rose:
JACKIE: Though, I still say we should take him to hospital.
ROSE: We can't. They'd lock him up. They'd dissect him. One bottle of his blood could change the future of the human race.
Mind you, just look at Solomon... there is a nasty, money-grabbing side to the universe/human nature. It doesn't show up in DW very often, but I like the fact that it's acknowledged.
Yay, you wrote something \o/ 'Tis well and good.
:) (Couldn't have done it without you...)
Which isn't to say that she can't be a thing of some kind.
That's more along the lines that I was thinking, yes. Mostly I just wanted to mirror River.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
"What if we had ideas that could think for themselves? What if one day our dreams no longer needed us? When these things occur and are held to be true, the time will be upon us. The time of Angels."
So, if Clara is a dream (memory) that can think for itself, then there is this:
“Nothing is ever forgotten, not completely. And if something can be remembered, it can come back...”
The Doctor has often been called an Angel (Girl in the Fireplace, Maggie called him an angel in the 2011 Christmas Special, and he's directly paralleled with the Weeping Angels in TAtM). Now presuming that Clara is Gallifreyan in origin - could she be the memory of Gallifrey? And her lines ("Run you clever boy, and remember!") could mean that he has to remember Gallifrey back into existence...
That would certainly be a suitably grand 'Time of Angels'.
Thank you, that literally just came to me now!
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Doctor: "I look at you every single day and I don't understand a single thing about you!"
Oh, I LOVED this one too. Especially with the Doctor's frantic, frustrated tone.
Also loving the theory of Oswin being a thing, the importance of memory/what Clara might remember, and the way you pointed out the fact that the Claras all adapt very well to their environment. And that was a lovely parallel to Donna's Library children! I don't really have anything interesting or smart to say besides, so I'll just repeat that all those clever thoughts were brilliance and thank you for sharing them ;)
no subject
Just under the wire! :D
was fascinated by the whole person-pulling-strings part—gosh, I'd completely forgotten all that stuff you picked up on about the beginning of Asylum, but it's… well, huge. And I love you for all the arguments showing /just/ how huge it was ;) ANTICIPATION!
There is so much THERE. I feel like I've only just touched on a bit of it, but if I delved deeper I would have to spend another month writing... And there is NEW SHOW TOMORROW!
Oh, I LOVED this one too. Especially with the Doctor's frantic, frustrated tone.
Mmmmmm. *is excited*
Also loving the theory of Oswin being a thing, the importance of memory/what Clara might remember, and the way you pointed out the fact that the Claras all adapt very well to their environment.
Yes, I think my current ideas can be summed up in 'Gallifreyan memory egg'. ;)
And that was a lovely parallel to Donna's Library children!
I have you to thank for that! ♥
I don't really have anything interesting or smart to say besides, so I'll just repeat that all those clever thoughts were brilliance and thank you for sharing them ;)
Totally my pleasure!
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
I was going to post it to
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I completely forgot about the hooded figure! It is a serious hint at the possibility for the Doctor to face higher powers. Since the beginning of New Who, we have been told the Doctor is without rules, a Lonely God, the last of his kind. Maybe, at last, he will meet some authority to rescale the story.
What you said about Clara being a puppet is spot-on. She is double, she cannot be what she appears to be. Her name even holds that duplicity: two names with an alliteration. She is also a receptacle, like a radio she picks up signals. Like a mirror, she reflects the Doctor -that whole scene on the rooftop in the Snowmen!
I entirely follow you on the porosity between thing/human -Rory, after all, was a plastic centurion and a robot, Amy a doll and a ganger, the Doctor a ganger and a Teselecta. Perhaps that highly ethical Ganger episode will be put to good use at last... What's more, Melody was such a flawed weapon there is no way the armies of villains after the Doctor's head would pass an opportunity to use something more efficient.
I'm not sure about the fact she has been constructed; she has to. Yet her ability to get picked up so easily by ANY telepathic fields (The Great Intelligence, the Daleks on the Asylum, the Wi-Fi judging by the trailers) bothers me and may hint at her being 'something brand new', really a new species or phenomenon, that attracts the attention of many people, villains or not...
I really like your key/egg theory, which really makes sense considering the scene where Rory hands the 'egg' to the Dalek thus triggering their awakening. Now I really want her to be a Gallifreyan key, because Gallifrey needs to come back!
Names are very important. While I was still trying to figure out what to do with Oswald, I started to extrapolate on her name only and it ended up orientating the whole theory I builded up about her. Moffat already showed us how important names are, I hope he won't let us down.
no subject
Thank you. I'll have to look up yours. :)
I completely forgot about the hooded figure! It is a serious hint at the possibility for the Doctor to face higher powers. Since the beginning of New Who, we have been told the Doctor is without rules, a Lonely God, the last of his kind. Maybe, at last, he will meet some authority to rescale the story.
Well if the Silence are the hooded figures minions [in some capacity or other] then there already has been someone trying to curb him. Heck even the Alliance at the end of S5 did that. (As Moffat once said - the Doctor is, essentially, an unarmed man who can't drive. *g*)
What you said about Clara being a puppet is spot-on. She is double, she cannot be what she appears to be. Her name even holds that duplicity: two names with an alliteration. She is also a receptacle, like a radio she picks up signals. Like a mirror, she reflects the Doctor -that whole scene on the rooftop in the Snowmen!
Mmmmmm. She's a wonderful, delicious mystery! <3
I entirely follow you on the porosity between thing/human -Rory, after all, was a plastic centurion and a robot, Amy a doll and a ganger, the Doctor a ganger and a Teselecta. Perhaps that highly ethical Ganger episode will be put to good use at last...
Oh the Gangers. I didn't particularly like the episodes themselves, but I did love all the ideas.
What's more, Melody was such a flawed weapon there is no way the armies of villains after the Doctor's head would pass an opportunity to use something more efficient.
Something much less obvious...
I'm not sure about the fact she has been constructed; she has to. Yet her ability to get picked up so easily by ANY telepathic fields (The Great Intelligence, the Daleks on the Asylum, the Wi-Fi judging by the trailers) bothers me and may hint at her being 'something brand new', really a new species or phenomenon, that attracts the attention of many people, villains or not...
I'm hesitant to delve too deeply in, until we have more to go on, to be honest. But the thing about being an unwitting weapon/tool is that she doesn't really know her own power, like River did. So whereas River could always look after herself, Clara strikes me as much more vulnerable.
I really like your key/egg theory, which really makes sense considering the scene where Rory hands the 'egg' to the Dalek thus triggering their awakening. Now I really want her to be a Gallifreyan key, because Gallifrey needs to come back!
Oh I don't think Gallifrey will come back (there are several reasons for this), but something Gallifreyan might do...
Names are very important. While I was still trying to figure out what to do with Oswald, I started to extrapolate on her name only and it ended up orientating the whole theory I builded up about her. Moffat already showed us how important names are, I hope he won't let us down.
I have every confidence in Moffat. Esp considering that Claras names are so odd.
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I was wondering about CAL, and I know you've dismissed it, but I can't help but feel that whatever happens, we have got to come back to that Library episode before Moffat-era Who is done.
But by and large, I am a dullish sort who sits here, happy to be told a story and wait and see!
This is v v interesting though - and New Who tonight! \o/
no subject
It's the anniversary. Would make sense to 'go back to the beginning'.
I was wondering about CAL, and I know you've dismissed it, but I can't help but feel that whatever happens, we have got to come back to that Library episode before Moffat-era Who is done.
Everything ties back to the Library by default. It is the foundation of everything that comes after - and River dies to preserve it.
But by and large, I am a dullish sort who sits here, happy to be told a story and wait and see!
Oh same here. I just can't switch my brain off...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
It could be leading up to... well, Gallifrey as a whole would be disappointing, but bringing back/out a few Time Lords could be interesting: not the last but without going back to being a renegade. Something new.
It could end up being the Time Lords behind the whole thing: the various plot sall seem to result in the universe nearly being destroyed, and we already know that Rassilon wanted the universe destroyed. Not sure if Moffat would do that. I sswear RTD knew the cracks were coming when he wrote in the CyberKing, and if that could be co-ordinated then maybe it could go the other way too.
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I think that Clara is related to Gallifrey too and that Moffat has been playing a long game . His work on New Who reminds me quite a bit of Life on Mars in style- where the plot of the week didn't matter other than in relation to the larger themes of the show. Also, Lemony Snicket. The irony of Snicket's second series being titled All the wrong questions is wonderful but makes me wonder if we are doing the same thing with Moffat who.
Then again, with River, she was practically everyone's theory at once, so who knows...
no subject
There'll be more where this came from! I'm working on a post about all the layers. :)
I think that Clara is related to Gallifrey too and that Moffat has been playing a long game . His work on New Who reminds me quite a bit of Life on Mars in style- where the plot of the week didn't matter other than in relation to the larger themes of the show.
Which is funny, considering that they're so carefully doing bit stand-alone pieces every week. ;)
The irony of Snicket's second series being titled All the wrong questions is wonderful but makes me wonder if we are doing the same thing with Moffat who.
The thing about Moffat is that he tells you the answer, you just have to find out HOW.
Then again, with River, she was practically everyone's theory at once, so who knows...
*nods* And she ended up as being ALL THE THINGS, so I'm totally expecting Clara to be ALL THE THINGS also. (Different things to River, obviously.)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Shot in the dark, but she seems to exist across time and space, her insides are different from her outsides, she even has a signature color . . . I wonder if she could be a TARDIS egg? And if so, is she descended from a Gallifreyan TARDIS, or is she something the Silence made? (Actually, the two aren't mutually exclusive at all, since the memory-proof aliens—call them the Silents to distinguish them from the religious sect—appear to be technological scavengers rather than creators. It would be completely in character for them to kit-bash something together from Gallifreyan tech and human DNA and whatever else was handy.)
(“names are the consequences of things”)
Having watched the episode, one thing that jumped out at me and shouted, "Look at me!" is that Clara Oswald just chose the name Oswin. In Moffat-land, renaming is one of the most significant things there is. So I'd say that it's pretty important—and hopeful!—that Clara just named herself God's friend rather than God's power.
no subject
OOOH I like this theory! This is interesting! I'm not sure Modern Clara's insides are really different from her outsides, except when she's temporarily stuck inside the Wifi, but she DOES want to travel (101 Places) and she may not always be where the Doctor expects to find her, but she's always where he needs her to be...
Not to mention that she is slightly psychic (as Victorian!Clara and Dalek!Oswin) and both a human and a machine (as Clara and Dalek!Oswin), and managed to make contact with the Doctor's Tardis very easily.
She is the Doctor's 'friend' and his 'power' and his source of light - so very fitting!
In the incoherent meta post I wrote a week or so ago, I wrote that she does seem to have some sort of inbuilt chameleon circuit, like the Tardis, to help her blend in across all the places in time and space she ends up - and so I was particularly excited by the 'active camouflage' employed by the Spoonheads in this ep, which is more or less the same thing. Foreshadowing?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
One idea i've been thinking of is that Clara was stolen for a year, "blueprints" taken of her and put back and forward in time in order to lead the Doctor to this current Clara who is the real one. There's a moment in The Snowmen where the Doctor is talking about the ice woman being a blueprint, and he looks directly at Clara as he says it - i wonder if that is a hint. Making her as a blueprint for what though? To some end - I don't know what, but maybe a trap and one that is leading him towards Trenzalore.
Or...as you say, some sort of egg- linking into all the egg symbolism. When you talk about how Donna's children became "real" in the Library, I'm reminded of the Great Intelligence's quote again in the Snowmen "now the dream has come alive and outlives the dreamer" and also from series 5 "what if we had ideas that could think for themselves"?
Still love the Gallifreyan time egg theory - eggs seeded thruogh time to ensure the survival of the race perhaps, and this one has "hatched". Now, if the answer to the Question were to unlock the Time War this would link even further - but i'm not sure Moff will take it there.
Again, totally agree that all Claras/Oswins are iterations of the one. I remember reading Promethia's meta (think it was hers) talking about all eggs being one egg etc, and that being the way archetypes/symbols work - they lead back to the source. The key is remembering what the source is.
no subject
Lots of puppets through the season so far. (This will be discussed in my next post...)
One idea i've been thinking of is that Clara was stolen for a year, "blueprints" taken of her and put back and forward in time in order to lead the Doctor to this current Clara who is the real one
That would explain the missing year. Good thinking!
There's a moment in The Snowmen where the Doctor is talking about the ice woman being a blueprint, and he looks directly at Clara as he says it - i wonder if that is a hint. Making her as a blueprint for what though? To some end - I don't know what, but maybe a trap and one that is leading him towards Trenzalore.
I've got a theory... Well, sort of. Like I say, I'm working on another post. /o\
Or...as you say, some sort of egg- linking into all the egg symbolism. When you talk about how Donna's children became "real" in the Library, I'm reminded of the Great Intelligence's quote again in the Snowmen "now the dream has come alive and outlives the dreamer" and also from series 5 "what if we had ideas that could think for themselves"?
This. Everyone is bringing it up, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's important. Plus her keywords are 'run' and 'remember'.
Still love the Gallifreyan time egg theory - eggs seeded through time to ensure the survival of the race perhaps, and this one has "hatched". Now, if the answer to the Question were to unlock the Time War this would link even further - but i'm not sure Moff will take it there.
Nope. Empire is gone, can't bring it back. (As I illustrate in my Layers post. *g*) Gallifrey is gooooooone. And the more I think about it, the most I'm leaning towards Clara being a Silence/puppet master thing.
Again, totally agree that all Claras/Oswins are iterations of the one. I remember reading Promethia's meta (think it was hers) talking about all eggs being one egg etc, and that being the way archetypes/symbols work - they lead back to the source. The key is remembering what the source is.
M-hm. There are rules for these kinds of things. :)