Howling:The Valeyard after The Time of the Doctor

The Valeyard IS coming back to the new series.

One month after The Name of the Doctor (when the Valeyard is mentioned by the GI) the BBC uploaded a video called "The truth about the Valeyard". In the description they assume that the Valeyard is a FUTURE VERSION of the Doctor.

There's also a clearer version of "what is the Valeyard acording to the Master": " The Master claims that the Valeyard is the distillation of the Doctor's darker side, from between the Doctor's twelfth and final incarnations."

We know that the twelfth incarnation is the Meta-Crisis Tenth Doctor who appears to be darker than the 10th Doctor himself. We have already seen the 11th's dark side in Amy's Choice.

Then, going straight to the point, what if the Valeyard is made of the meta-crisis', 11th's and future doctor's dark sides instead of going to appear between his "12th and final incarnations"?

The High Council knew about the Valeyard, so Gallifrey would exists in the future...

What do you guys think?

-- Guagliona ☎  07:03, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

That video was just a clip from Trial of a Time Lord. It didn't offer any new information. For what it's worth, Moffat has said that he never really understood the Valeyard storyline and considers him a dull villain. So I doubt we'll be seeing him again. Personally, I believe he was just one possible future for the Doctor. I don't think any of the glimpses we've seen of the Doctor's future are meant to be set in stone. Trenzalore certainly wasn't. Here's how I see it: The Doctor originally died on Trenzalore, leaving behind the scar tissue we saw in Name of the Doctor. By granting the Doctor a new set of regenerations, the Time Lords changed that future. But the original timeline still exists. Imagine if you will that the Doctor and Clara are traveling on a train and that train is heading towards the Doctor's tomb. The events of Time of the Doctor shift them onto a different set of train tracks. The track they were initially traveling on is still there (which is why Clara was able to enter the Doctor's timeline and everything she did there still happened). It's just that they're traveling on a new track now. I think something similar may have happened with the Valeyard. Maybe the events of Trial convinced the Doctor to take steps that would prevent him from ever becoming the Valeyard. I can't help but wonder if Moffat namechecked him in Series 7 to remind people that if the Doctor knows his own future, he can change it. Slughorn42 ☎  16:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * The Master says that the Valeyard comes between the Doctor's twelfth and final incarnations. We don't know how he came across that knowledge. He may be misinformed, or he may well have known that the Doctor would reach a forteenth incarnation and beyond. The fact is, we haven't yet seen (we hope!) the Doctor's final incarnation, so there's still a lot of room for the Valeyard to turn up in... assuming that the Doctor hasn't successfully ever avoided becoming him at all86.178.202.150talk to me

Slughorn42, "if the Doctor knows his own future, he can change it": Yes. It's an example of what could be termed a "self-negating prophecy". (At least, it is, if the Doctor does manage to avoid giving rise to the Valeyard.) In any case, whoever wrote the description of that video seems to have misunderstood what was said in Trial of a Time Lord. --89.243.197.97talk to me 07:41, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

I think it's significant to note the specificity of the Master's language in this case "between his twelfth and final incarnations"- "twelfth" now qualifying as either his post-Meta Crisis 10th self, 11th, or 12th Doctor- "final incarnation" now being pushed back an additional 13 regenerations. This means that ANY Doctor from here on out, Capaldi included, could be a candidate for the Valeyard.--anonymoustalk to me 07:41, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

Is it just me or does the actor who plays the Valeyard in that serial looks like Capaldi?


 * Please sign your posts with four tildes as directed above. Shambala108 ☎  18:33, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

As a note, the actor who played the Val is still alive, so he could be brought back at any time, and should. He recently did a Big Finish audio. As for Moffat saying he was boring... I would like to see that quote, because Moffat is often either GREATLY mis-quoted, or his quotes are just faked. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 16:06, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

Michael Jayston is indeed still alive. Of course, it's been nearly thirty years since he last played the Valeyard on screen and he's aged quite a bit. Also, one of the guidelines for the Virgin New Adventures was not to include the Valeyard because "he's a continuity nightmare and a rather dull villain". So it's not just Moffat who finds him boring. Slughorn42 ☎  16:27, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

Other things that the Virgin books said:
 * ''The Doctor's Mother is not a human, but is a sewing machine.
 * He was born as old as he looks

In hat respect, they have no right to complain about "a continuity nightmare," specificalkly one as interesting as the Valeard. I've learned from my experience What I am saying about the Mof quote is two things:

1) People often either mis-quote him or made up quotes. Like the ones where he said sexist things and it turned out it was from an interview where he discussed the writing of one of is sexist characters, or such.

2) Rule 1. Remember earlier this year when Moffat was quoted as saying things like "Why would I make a multi-Doctor story? They always come across as more parties, and that's not what we want," and "We might not even do a multi-Doctor story." Moffat almost always precedes what he does with the promise that he will not do it, just to surprise us even more. The way it sounds to me is that series 8 might have our favorite little shadow looming behind the Doctor at all times. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 14:52, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, well, one Virgin book said those things. Lungbarrow to be precise. With regards to what the Moff says, it's true he does occasionally lie about what he has planned for the new series. But when it comes to the classic series, he generally seems to be speaking his mind. Let's face it. The Valeyard is something that only diehard fans know about so bringing him back now to resolve a storyline from 1986 doesn't make much sense to me. Slughorn42 ☎  19:26, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Slughorn42, Moffat "does occasionally lie"? I think that's understating somewhat. However, you're right that it's about future stories that he lies, not past ones.

Bringing the Valeyard "back now to resolve a storyline from 1986" doesn't make sense to me, either, unless Moffat were going to do something like revealing that the downright nasty way the Time Lords behaved in the Time War was all because of the Valeyard manipulating the Matrix. There seem to me to be 2 main problems with this idea: (1) only "diehard fans" will even understand what it's about & (2) it has more corn in it than a planetful of Iowas -- not even the worst of fan-fiction writers would touch it. (If I'm wrong about that, please, please don't tell me!)

The only real way the Valeyard ought to be relevant now is (as in The Name of the Doctor) as something the Doctor bears in mind he might give rise to, if he's not careful: a reminder that he does have a "dark side" that needs to be kept in check. --89.243.192.213talk to me 22:15, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

We've already been reminded that the Doctor has a dark side in the new series. That's what the character of the Dream Lord in Amy's Choice was all about. Been there, done that. Slughorn42 ☎  22:26, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Yes. What I meant was that a passing reference, now & then, would be OK -- but nothing more than a passing reference. That's how it was in The Name of the Doctor. Nobody needed to know anything about the Valeyard to understand what was going on. --89.243.192.213talk to me 22:35, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

"[B]ringing him back now to resolve a storyline from 1986 doesn't make much sense"? Moffat put a lot of effort giving us 3 episodes this past season dealing with a storyline left relatively untouched since the  ' 60s from episodes that, at the time, were missing 10 parts out of 12 parts! I don't think vintage should be taken into consideration as a anti-likelyhood factor when it comes to the potential subject matter upcoming stories. —BioniclesaurKing4t2 - "Hello, I'm the Doctor. Basically, . . . run." 23:48, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Yes but the Great Intelligence is a rather vague entity that doesn't require much in the way of explanation. The Valeyard is a very specific type of villain with a complicated backstory. I don't see how he could be brought back without confusing the hell out of 90% of the audience. Slughorn42 ☎  00:04, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

For some reason, I'm reminded of people claiming River Song was the Rani in disguise. Anyway... The Valeyard was an articifially created entity made from hog futures, designed with a single purpose in mind: convince a courtroom that the Doctor is guilty of random trumped-up charges.

In order to accomplish this task he is given numerous tools: the ability to see the future, the ability to see the past, & the ability to edit these to suit his needs.

As incentive, upon accomplishing this task, he will receive the Doctor's remaining lifespan.

Anyway, he fails, horrendously. Upon this failure, he decides to kill the Doctor in a computer program because REASONS. If he succeeds at this, he'll probably cease to exist. If he fails, he'll probably cease to exist. I can see why people who make money writing scripts have avoided using this villain for so long: they wish to stay employed. 72.177.169.170talk to me 01:58, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

72: Don't forget that "people who make money writing scripts" perpetrated the Valeyard in the first place! (OK, most of those involved in writing the latter part of Trial of a Time Lord were saddled with finishing a story someone else had begun, without knowing how the original writer had intended to resolve it, & without much time in which to think, let alone to redraft & revise, so it may be a bit unfair to blame them too much.)

As Slughorn42 points out, the vital difference between the Great Intelligence & the Valeyard is that, with the GI, there were very, very few details in the legacy over which a writer could trip; it was an almost clear field for invention (not re-invention). The only constraints that the legacy imposed were that (1) the GI had to be able to do what The Abominable Snowmen, The Web of Fear & (probably) Downtime said it had done & (2) it had to be plausible that the GI might choose to do those things. With the Valeyard, there's a lot of awkward detail to explain.

The only reason I can see for Moffat attempting a Valeyard story would be if (1) the loose ends are really, really bugging him & (2) he's thought of an utterly brilliant way of tidying them up. --89.241.221.183talk to me 17:32, January 31, 2014 (UTC)