Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes/Vincent and the Doctor


 * Vincent Van Gogh had cut his year off in 1888. The picture of the church was painted in 1890. van Gogh had two ears in the episode. how come?
 * This wiki doesn't take the real world into account: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Tardis:Valid_sources#The_real_world_doesn.27t_count


 * How does going back to check on van Gogh after looking at the monster-in-the-church painting, and preventing the monster from being included in it, not mess up timelines like in Father's Day?


 * Unlike Father's Day, at no point does the Doctor cross his own timeline in this story.


 * One other thing to remember is that from the Doctor's perspective, nearly * every* story is taking place in "the past" (from some perspective). He is constantly changing events. He just (usually) knows how to do it in such a way that it doesn't have the dangerous effects that Rose caused in Father's Day.


 * Why does the Doctor need to hurry Dr Black for an answer of when the picture was painted? The Doctor has a time machine, he can get to Paris any time, he doesn't need to hurry?


 * He's most probably eager to sort Vincent van Gogh out. Plus he doesn't want Doctor Black to ramble on with information that he probably mostly already knows.


 * In addition, he probably didn't want to take time away from the museum visitors.


 * The implication does seem to be that he's in a rush, as if the times were somehow connected (similar to the beginning of The End of Time).


 * In the beginning, when the Tardis Materialises in the town, A cat is closeby and gets scared off, meaning it saw the Tardis and got scared, Most of the time the tardis can materialise anywhere and people won't take notice due to a cloaking mechanism, are cats immune to the Tardis' Cloaking Mechanism?


 * Why can Vincent see the Krafayis? This is never explained.


 * It's implied it's due to his unique way of seeing the world.


 * When the Doctor, Amy and Vincent are about to enter his house the Doctor says "Dark night very starry" Vincent replies "It's not much". Then near the end he thinks and sees differently and he sees what will become the "Starry night" but when they entered his house at the start we see a starry night.


 * It is completely unclear what the above comment is trying to say. However, to correct a misunderstanding: When Vincent says: "It's not much.", he's not actually replying to the Doctor. He's referring to his home as being 'not much', and follows up with "I live on my own."


 * How can there be words 'For Amy' in Sunflowers? Sunflowers was painted in 1888, but the Doctor and Amy visited Vincent in 1890.


 * Since Vincent Van Gogh made many changes to his Sunflower paintings, it is entirely possible for him to include an additional change during a later year for him to dedicate the painting to Amy.


 * The story implies that Vincent hadn't painted any sunflowers yet. He considers them "a little disgusting" and thinks they would be "a challenge". That said, one should never forget that ever since An Unearthly Child, various Doctor Who stories have been pointing out that our historical records are not always entirely accurate. Basically, discrepancies between the Who Universe history and our history are not discontinuities.


 * How does Amy buy a bottle of wine for Vincent? Does she carry 19th century French currency on her?
 * While never explained, it was shown that the psychic paper can be used as currency substitute.
 * But that still isn't Amy buying the wine, since the paper is on the Doctor. She'd have to intercede, say she'll buy the wine, and then turn to the Doctor and ask for his paper.


 * It's been mentioned a few times that people will notice the Doctor and companions' clothes (it only makes sense) (The Unquiet Dead (TV story)Tooth and Claw (TV story)). So how come no-one thinks Amy is a "feral child" like Rose?