For the second week running, there was no mention whatsoever of Melody and no evidence that either of her parents were giving her a second thought. I know some viewers don't find that a problem
I do! I'm finding it such a problem that it's starting to spoil my enjoyment of the series. The fact that baby Melody grows into River Song doesn't make what happened to her OK, but the fact that Rory and Amy seem to think it does just boggles my mind.
in last week's episode, we had a storyline concerning a young child who was terrified of being abandoned,
Yes, I just don't get it. If the Doctor hares across the galaxy to save this child why didn't he do it for Melody. I'm sure there's some deeply clever timey wimey reason but at the moment it's eluding me.
I'm (sort of) glad it's not just me that has a problem with the idea that the Ponds appear to have accepted that they'll never get to raise their daughter. I see so many comments around excusing their (so far) lack of concern about her, and putting it down to - - it was so traumatic that they can't talk about it - they know she grows up into River and that she's alright so they don't have to worry any more - they grew up with her (as Mels) so they did get to "raise" her - Amy didn't know she was pregnant and didn't have time to adjust to the idea of parentood - Amy and Rory didn't have time to adjust to being parents so they don't really miss it
and various other - frankly - stupid excuses.
SM clearly didn't think through the implications as he was too preoccupied with his masterful plotting around River.
I don't get why people excuse it or try to candy-coat it.
Nor do I. And I've seen such a lot of people jumping through various hoops trying to justify it - because for many of them, Moffat can do no wrong.
Thing is - how do you explain something so fundamental as the link between a parent and child? Regardless of the fact that Amy didn't know she was pregnant, she still gave birth, her body was full of the necessary hormones and she got to spend at least a small amount of time with her child. Until I became a parent, I had no idea just how strongly I would feel about my children and how instantaneous and simply HUGE that feeling would be.
I'm sure it's a very personal thing - but I'm also sure that the majority of parents experience the same.
Are you a mindreader? Because this is pretty much exactly what I thought of TGWW and TGC. Those last 2 episodes have been so rich in character development, it almost makes up for the rest of the season.
But Moff seems to think that all that needed to be said about the baby plot was said by the end of LKH.
I've been discussing this elsewhere, and really, Moff did not think through any implications of the whole baby storyline. He was simply too enamored of it to care what fridging Amy or denying her a chance at parenthood would look like. TGWW would have been a perfect episode to comment on them in context of Mature!Amy's loss of faith in the Doctor. But nope, nada. OTOH, emotions like those are messy, and I can't help but notice Moffat didn't write TGWW, or TGC. /catty
And Karen Gillan acted her socks off! TGWW was Karen's tour de force.
Is that the house in which Amy and Rory are settled when we see them at the start of the series?
No. The house in TIA had a white door. I hope they don't time-loop Amy and Rory though.
I can't help but notice Moffat didn't write TGWW, or TGC.*nods*. But let's face it - he's the guy who thinks that "Oooh - here's a hole. Let's go down it and see what happens" is a good idea for a story! *g
( ... )
The lack of concern for Melody is *bizarre* I have no idea how an entire production team could just handwave it as they (so far) have. If you don't want the fallout of them losing their baby, don't do it in the first place! It's really dragging things down and the only way I deal with it is by ignoring it, which is really not ideal.
Spot on. This is exactly why I didn't like the idea in the first place.
I, too, am sort of ignoring the issue, insofar as I've decided to concentrate on the standalones rather than on the overarcing plot. I like River, but I don't really care any more about who she is, and whether she's married to the Doctor, or whether she kills him... I know that DW isn't the show one watches when one wants realism - but I think that what any good sci-fi show does is to show us that human reactions are the same, regardless of where we are in time or space. That's one of the ways in which we are (sometimes) able to see past a creaky or hole-filled plot, because we care about the people and can perhaps identify with them. But Amy's and Rory's reaction makes no sense whatsoever, regardless of whether or not they knew they were going to be parents, etc. etc.
It was too big a thing for the standalones to deal with, I think. Those are meant to be fun or whatever, but the baby plotline requires Amy and Rory to be upset. The two just don't gel. It was too serious/dark a thing for DW, I reckons, which is a bit surprising in a way because I always think of Rusty as the darker writer. Something like the Doctor's death you can carry on with it hardly or never mentioned, but not the baby. It's very strange to me that they did that.
Also! With River I find she's one of those people I don't really want concrete answers on. I'd rather she was just recurring occasionally and we didn't learn that much about her than we learned every single detail so she had to leave. I never cared who her parents were, y'know?
none of the writers seemed to realized this would be incredibly traumatic for Amy.Exactly. Although I have to disagree with you about Amy not being able to form a bond with her baby. IMO, that bond just happens - and of course, I can only speak as one who was cognisant of pregnancy and prepared for the arrival of a baby, but I still can't see how that makes much of a difference. She gave birth, held her baby and was able to spend at least some time with her in the first month of her life. And I'm afraid that the argument that Amy and Rory know about the laws of time, or that they got to grow up with Mels doesn't hold water with me either. Losing your child would surely be one of the most traumatic things anyone could ever experience - and I know that I, personally, wouldn't be capable of thinking as rationally as that if one of my kids had been stolen away
( ... )
Comments 11
I do! I'm finding it such a problem that it's starting to spoil my enjoyment of the series. The fact that baby Melody grows into River Song doesn't make what happened to her OK, but the fact that Rory and Amy seem to think it does just boggles my mind.
in last week's episode, we had a storyline concerning a young child who was terrified of being abandoned,
Yes, I just don't get it. If the Doctor hares across the galaxy to save this child why didn't he do it for Melody. I'm sure there's some deeply clever timey wimey reason but at the moment it's eluding me.
Reply
- it was so traumatic that they can't talk about it
- they know she grows up into River and that she's alright so they don't have to worry any more
- they grew up with her (as Mels) so they did get to "raise" her
- Amy didn't know she was pregnant and didn't have time to adjust to the idea of parentood
- Amy and Rory didn't have time to adjust to being parents so they don't really miss it
and various other - frankly - stupid excuses.
SM clearly didn't think through the implications as he was too preoccupied with his masterful plotting around River.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Nor do I. And I've seen such a lot of people jumping through various hoops trying to justify it - because for many of them, Moffat can do no wrong.
Thing is - how do you explain something so fundamental as the link between a parent and child? Regardless of the fact that Amy didn't know she was pregnant, she still gave birth, her body was full of the necessary hormones and she got to spend at least a small amount of time with her child. Until I became a parent, I had no idea just how strongly I would feel about my children and how instantaneous and simply HUGE that feeling would be.
I'm sure it's a very personal thing - but I'm also sure that the majority of parents experience the same.
That remark of Amy's was too little, too late.
Reply
But Moff seems to think that all that needed to be said about the baby plot was said by the end of LKH.
I've been discussing this elsewhere, and really, Moff did not think through any implications of the whole baby storyline. He was simply too enamored of it to care what fridging Amy or denying her a chance at parenthood would look like. TGWW would have been a perfect episode to comment on them in context of Mature!Amy's loss of faith in the Doctor. But nope, nada. OTOH, emotions like those are messy, and I can't help but notice Moffat didn't write TGWW, or TGC. /catty
And Karen Gillan acted her socks off! TGWW was Karen's tour de force.
Is that the house in which Amy and Rory are settled when we see them at the start of the series?
No. The house in TIA had a white door. I hope they don't time-loop Amy and Rory though.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I, too, am sort of ignoring the issue, insofar as I've decided to concentrate on the standalones rather than on the overarcing plot. I like River, but I don't really care any more about who she is, and whether she's married to the Doctor, or whether she kills him... I know that DW isn't the show one watches when one wants realism - but I think that what any good sci-fi show does is to show us that human reactions are the same, regardless of where we are in time or space. That's one of the ways in which we are (sometimes) able to see past a creaky or hole-filled plot, because we care about the people and can perhaps identify with them. But Amy's and Rory's reaction makes no sense whatsoever, regardless of whether or not they knew they were going to be parents, etc. etc.
I really think it's been a huge mistake.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment