Ncuti Gatwa is the 15th Doctor

[jaime]

No, they established they couldn't find a limit to it.

That does not equal infinite.

The oldest race in the galaxy, with the power to manipulate stars and travel through time, across the boundaries between universes, banish old gods to outside of existence itself, and engineer their bodies on a cellular level, could not find a limit to it.

That will pass for infinite I expect. It was certainly the narrative intent.

The weird thing is, we know the Doctor can be killed without regeneration, we’ve seen it happen (Turn Left) so how does that factor in with the Timeless Child?

 

[Tomalak]

“Time Lords can live forever, barring accidents”,

The Timeless Child doesn’t upset the numbering system, because the First Doctor’s mind had been wiped of everything that had gone before. As far as he, and other Time Lords were concerned, he was the first.

It’s really the metacrisis and the War Doctor who mess it up, as he points out in Time of the Doctor.

 

[Mr Awe]

A rebellious adventurer, nothing special particularly, going out into the universe is a much better story than the victim narrative and chosen-one status now retconned in its place. A man that fought monsters because he was afraid of them as a child (itself a bit of a retcon) is better story than the redemption that it now resembles for his/her time with crufts SAS division. A unique origin has been turned into a cliche overnight.

100% this!

And conversely, if Chibnall really wanted to play with a timeless child character, make it the Master. The early experimentation would explain his evilness and running away. It also fits in with his odd ability to survive death!

And having a more regular adventurer (Doctor) facing an amped up villain makes a better story. It's like a regular cop stopping an international terrorist (Die Hard). Doesn't work so well the other way around--slick super spy stopping a common crook!

 

[The Wormhole]

No, they established they couldn't find a limit to it.

That does not equal infinite.

Eh, it might as well be infinite since we know the Doctor will always regenerate since otherwise there's no show and indeed no franchise.

And really the only reason a regeneration limit was introduced was to serve as a plot point for The Deadly Assassin.

 

[DigificWriter]

Because Doctor Who has no set Canon, bickering over whether or not the Doctor can regenerate indefinitely is pointless, as what continued impact the Doctor being the Timeless Child has or doesn't have on the show in the future will entirely depend on the creative inclinations of individual future Showrunners.

 

[David cgc]

In other words, 12 more regenerations.
All that Chibnall rubbish about infinite Doctors - I totally reject. Even the so-called Fugitive Doctor is not a 'real' Doctor for me. Yes, I'm an old fogey about this, but if death had no force for the Doctor then avoiding regeneration as much as possible would be pointless.

Even before the Timeless Child, it was suggested in "Kill the Moon" and "Hell Bent" that the Doctor got an indefinite, potentially infinite number of regenerations from the Time Lords. And, honestly, it's better not to nail it down. It gives the Doctor more perspective if they're never sure they've got another regeneration in the bag (and, apparently, since the Eleventh Doctor repeatedly attempted to, threatened to, or otherwise assumed he could regenerate, they won't know they're out until they try and nothing happens), and it also means the writers don't have to keep score and figure out another way to get more regenerations once we're clearing the path for the 27th Doctor. Or 25th, assuming no more skips.

And conversely, if Chibnall really wanted to play with a timeless child character, make it the Master. The early experimentation would explain his evilness and running away. It also fits in with his odd ability to survive death!

And having a more regular adventurer (Doctor) facing an amped up villain makes a better story. It's like a regular cop stopping an international terrorist (Die Hard). Doesn't work so well the other way around--slick super spy stopping a common crook!

It's more of a stretch after "Flux," but you could still twist that into place, since most of the information about the Timeless Child came from the Master, and the stuff in "Flux" also came from people who were blatantly coercing and manipulating the Doctor and didn't have her best interests at heart. The Fugitive Doctor is relatively easy to account for, just throw her into the greater Season 6b fan-theory, and have it turn out the "Journey's End" regeneration didn't actually count (like I mentioned above, the Doctor didn't seem to think it did, until he couldn't regenerate anymore in "Time" and made his best guess as to how he ran out early). You still have the issue that she didn't recognize the sonic screwdriver, but it's just as much of a snag that her TARDIS looks like a police box if she goes where "intended," so it's a wash, and there have been bigger conflicts in the show.

 

[jaime]

Because Doctor Who has no set Canon, bickering over whether or not the Doctor can regenerate indefinitely is pointless, as what continued impact the Doctor being the Timeless Child has or doesn't have on the show in the future will entirely depend on the creative inclinations of individual future Showrunners.

It has continuity though. And it does have a canon, even if you limit it to just what was on screen. Opinions may vary as to what the canon is, but that isn’t the same as not having one. He isn’t from Gallifrey one week and Wapping the next.

 

[jaime]

I would also add, that possibly the biggest narrative flaw that the Timeless Child concept has/had is that it retroactively affects many stories that have come before (often ones that occur around anniversary seasons, such as Mawdryn Undead and the Elevenths ‘of the doctor’ set for example — but not just those.)

It isn’t beyond fixing, but it’s a pain in the arse for many people that have stuck with the character for years. It’s… tarnish.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

No, it's not. The whole universe has always been wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey.

The Doctor was originally just a human in the far future. Until they were an alien.

The Doctor was originally just an alien with a singular life. Until they regenerated.

Time Lords could live indefinitely, barring accident. Until a limit was arbitrary set for a plot point.

That arbitrary limit was the rule. Until it wasn't for another plot point.

The TARDIS was originally just a time machine. Until it was a living organic being that could grow.

Weapons couldn't be fired inside the TARDIS. Until they could, including a Titanic through the walls.

The Doctor is non-violent. Until they aren't.

Companions were forbidden to visit Gallifrey. Until Leela visited with no issue at all within the same incarnation.

And so on.

The universe is always in flux. The Timeless Child is the current history. Until it isn't.

And even if that particular piece of history doesn't change, the Timeless Child doesn't damage anything that already existed. The past events still happened as we saw them because that's how the universe was at that time.

Continuity will always be extraordinarily messy in Doctor Who because that's the nature of the beast and that's part of the charm of the show.

To get angry about the constant changes only damages your own perspective of the show, not the actual essence.

 

[Starkers]

The Doctor only had one heart, until he had two etc etc....

I hate the Timless Child as a concept, but it doesn't really ruin anything because the Doctor has no recollection of those lives, they have no bearing on the personality of Hartnell through to Tennant 2.0 (or is it Tennant 3.0?) that's actually part of what I dislike about the concept. the Doctor can't be lauded or castigated for anything they did in a pre Hartnell incarnation because they don't remember it, they were effectively a different person.

I prefer to consider the Doctor as just A.N. Other Timelord, one who ran away from Gallifrey because they didn't fit in, rather than because they were super special, but the good thing about the Timless Child is that still works. As far as the First Doctor was concerned, they were the First Doctor, and that is why they left. That perhaps this desire to run away was prompted by some hidden crumb of knowledge buried deep in their subconscious about their true origin is neither here nor there, YMMV and you can choose either option.

TTC is the worst kind of epic change to the concept of the Doctor, precisely because it doesn't really change much. Not in the way that the introduction of the Timelords or even the War Doctor did.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

The Doctor only had one heart, until he had two etc etc....

I knew I had forgotten a big one!

I hate the Timless Child as a concept, but it doesn't really ruin anything because the Doctor has no recollection of those lives, they have no bearing on the personality of Hartnell through to Tennant 2.0 (or is it Tennant 3.0?) that's actually part of what I dislike about the concept. the Doctor can't be lauded or castigated for anything they did in a pre Hartnell incarnation because they don't remember it, they were effectively a different person.

I prefer to consider the Doctor as just A.N. Other Timelord, one who ran away from Gallifrey because they didn't fit in, rather than because they were super special, but the good thing about the Timless Child is that still works. As far as the First Doctor was concerned, they were the First Doctor, and that is why they left. That perhaps this desire to run away was prompted by some hidden crumb of knowledge buried deep in their subconscious about their true origin is neither here nor there, YMMV and you can choose either option.

TTC is the worst kind of epic change to the concept of the Doctor, precisely because it doesn't really change much. Not in the way that the introduction of the Timelords or even the War Doctor did.

I agree with most of this, particularly the point that The First Doctor didn't have those memories so that history doesn't effect his actions to depart nor the actions of his subsequent incarnations when railing against the Time Lords and galivanting through the universe. The only real issue I have with it is The Fugitive Doctor's TARDIS being a police box (even if that was only done as shorthand to show it was the TARDIS for the shock value).

 

[jaime]

No, it's not. The whole universe has always been wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey.

The Doctor was originally just a human in the far future. Until they were an alien.

The Doctor was originally just an alien with a singular life. Until they regenerated.

Time Lords could live indefinitely, barring accident. Until a limit was arbitrary set for a plot point.

That arbitrary limit was the rule. Until it wasn't for another plot point.

The TARDIS was originally just a time machine. Until it was a living organic being that could grow.

Weapons couldn't be fired inside the TARDIS. Until they could, including a Titanic through the walls.

The Doctor is non-violent. Until they aren't.

Companions were forbidden to visit Gallifrey. Until Leela visited with no issue at all within the same incarnation.

And so on.

The universe is always in flux. The Timeless Child is the current history. Until it isn't.

And even if that particular piece of history doesn't change, the Timeless Child doesn't damage anything that already existed. The past events still happened as we saw them because that's how the universe was at that time.

Continuity will always be extraordinarily messy in Doctor Who because that's the nature of the beast and that's part of the charm of the show.

To get angry about the constant changes only damages your own perspective of the show, not the actual essence.

Many of those things were assumptions or behind the scenes asumptions, rather that stated in the show itself (and ‘living Tardis’ starts as early as The Edge of Destruction) and usually when an apparent contradiction is introduced, it’s done in line with the well-known earlier stuff. Building on or up, rather than tearing down as it were. Some of those are also just a little bit wrong. (Temporal Grace having an on/off button, the Titanic isn’t a gun)

And I wouldn’t describe my personal reaction as anger… more a sense of ‘well, if the bloke running the thing doesn’t care, why should I?’ Followed by the realisation that as someone who did care for a long old time, then maybe me caring isn’t the problem, but the bloke in charge. Especially when, even on an episode to episode basis, he’s shown himself to just not be very good at storytelling or TV. He just wasn’t/isn’t.
It’s not even a style thing, I am generally not into certain eras of Who — gothic overtones not my thing in the show, and Douglas Adams could sometimes be a bit too silly for instance — but those *are* style things. Recent stuff has been emulative, and bad at the job.

 

[DigificWriter]

And it does have a canon

No, it doesn't.

The BBC has outright refused to establish an official Canon for Doctor Who.

 

[Starkers]

I knew I had forgotten a big one!


I agree with most of this, particularly the point that The First Doctor didn't have those memories so that history doesn't effect his actions to depart nor the actions of his subsequent incarnations when railing against the Time Lords and galivanting through the universe. The only real issue I have with it is The Fugitive Doctor's TARDIS being a police box (even if that was only done as shorthand to show it was the TARDIS for the shock value).

Yeah that's the thing that annoys me most as well

 

[jaime]

No, it doesn't.

The BBC has outright refused to establish an official Canon for Doctor Who.

Well, I can’t see them quite arranging the Council of Nicaea… it’s not the kind of thing anyone ever really does. In fact isn’t canonisation a thing more typically done by scholars of a given set of works or things? There was probably a Council arranged by the The Sisterhood of Karn in the nineties.

 

[jaime]

I knew I had forgotten a big one!


I agree with most of this, particularly the point that The First Doctor didn't have those memories so that history doesn't effect his actions to depart nor the actions of his subsequent incarnations when railing against the Time Lords and galivanting through the universe. The only real issue I have with it is The Fugitive Doctor's TARDIS being a police box (even if that was only done as shorthand to show it was the TARDIS for the shock value).

So, if we erase the Masters memory, does that make him innocent of his crimes? (A concept that has been done and played with multiple times) Or is there some other element at play? (As done really well with Missy.)

 

[DigificWriter]

Well, I can’t see them quite arranging the Council of Nicaea… it’s not the kind of thing anyone ever really does. In fact isn’t canonisation a thing more typically done by scholars of a given set of works or things? There was probably a Council arranged by the The Sisterhood of Karn in the nineties.

In the context of fiction, Canon is a specific set of stories and lore that anyone engaging with said fiction on a creative level must respect and acknowledge the existence of.

Doctor Who does not have that kind of framework, and the BBC has outright refused to establish said framework, instead being content to let each individual Producer, Script Editor/Showrunner, and/or indivdual writer add to or subtract from the cumulative lore of the property as they see fit.

 

[jaime]

In the context of fiction, Canon is a specific set of stories and lore that anyone engaging with said fiction on a creative level must respect and acknowledge the existence of.

Doctor Who does not have that kind of framework, and the BBC has outright refused to establish said framework, instead being content to let each individual Producer, Script Editor/Showrunner, and/or indivdual writer add to or subtract from the cumulative lore of the property as they see fit.

They don’t much care. But again — that doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Even if you limit yourself to what’s been on telly (or allowed to be — the bbc does have certain requests shall we say. The only time someone refused one that I know of was when Segal refused to cast anyone other than Sylvester in the TVM as Old Doctor.) then — with the occasional snarl notwithstanding — there is a continuity and a canon. It’s one of the things that helps all long running shows, but particularly in the case of Who. It is fun, for example, to look at how something like The Time War was built on little bits and pieces already present as far back as Genesis of The Daleks, or even further and Daleks Invasion of Earths line about not knowing when they were in relation to the first Dalek story.
Taking what’s there, and building on it. Lots of pieces. Hanging The TC on Morbius is a *lot* more of a reach, and the Cartmel era stuff doesn’t have quite the right flavour. Unless somehow Seven alone knew things.

 

[The Wormhole]

It has continuity though.

Terrance Dicks: "Continuity is only whatever I can remember."

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Many of those things were assumptions or behind the scenes asumptions, rather that stated in the show itself (and ‘living Tardis’ starts as early as The Edge of Destruction) and usually when an apparent contradiction is introduced, it’s done in line with the well-known earlier stuff. Building on or up, rather than tearing down as it were. Some of those are also just a little bit wrong. (Temporal Grace having an on/off button, the Titanic isn’t a gun)

You know what else was an assumption?

That The First Doctor was the first incarnation of The Doctor.

And it's not like what the Timeless Child presented was unprecedented: The Brain of Morbius hinted at this possibility decades ago.

To be clear, I railed against that notion for years. Just ask Allyn Gibson how much I pushed back against it every time he or others brought up that idea years before Chibnall took over.

But this is the history of The Doctor as it is now. Will that change? Maybe. Will it be ignored? We'll see.

And yet, for all of its possible faults, I still like it better than the Hybrid nonsense and I'm one of Moffat's biggest supporters outside of that, the whole picking up and dropping off companions willy-nilly, and Clara sticking around beyond "Last Christmas" (although that's partially Jenna Coleman's own fault).

And I wouldn’t describe my personal reaction as anger… more a sense of ‘well, if the bloke running the thing doesn’t care, why should I?’ Followed by the realisation that as someone who did care for a long old time, then maybe me caring isn’t the problem, but the bloke in charge. Especially when, even on an episode to episode basis, he’s shown himself to just not be very good at storytelling or TV. He just wasn’t/isn’t.

Uh-huh. I've seen the type of posts you've made over the years about Chibnall and his writing. If that's not anger...well, it's still not a healthy reaction.