Okay--I copied and pasted your replies in order so this made sense... even xkit has some limitations.
lilydragonwrites replied to your post “lilydragonwrites replied to your post “I’m watching Family of Blood...”
Yeah, with this and the other reply it becomes clear that there's no way he could have thought it through, you're right.
But still, if he didn't act wrong by going into hiding, the fact that he thought he was doing the best possible thing can negate the causal responsibility of what happened? In the end, the villagers were just collateral damage, just like the people in the buildings which the superheroes destroy when they're fighting.
And unlike the invading aliens who are already destroying Earth, these specific aliens wanted nothing to do with the people they killed - they were after the Doctor. It's not that he wished that it would happened in any way, or that he's morally compromised in his choices, but the tragic outcome is there, and the little humans of the past didn't stand a chance.
So the discussion of the Doctor showing mercy does not necessarily have to do with these people who died - of course the Doctor sympathises with these people and wishes they wouldn't be killed, they were just caught in the middle of the Family's scheme. But this time it has more to do with the fact that the humans had nothing to do with that fight and ended up caught up in it. This is how it ties in with Joan's answer.
So for Joan, when the Doctor invites her to travel with him, she sees this being who is way above humanity, dealing with threats that are way over what their species can deal with at the time, and sees how little her people and life can be, how pathetic their defences were against the Family's weapons, how they can mean nothing in some grand galactic scheme.
So when human-John-at-her-level is replaced with this being that can cause (maybe not be guilty of, but stil) all this chaos and destruction just because he exists there, it makes her think that he Doctor has to play games in which humanity is not even a pawn, only collateral damage. And this is what she rejects - and it ends up being an interesting reminder of just how alien the Doctor can appear to be despite his humanness (especially with 10, who craves this).
So that's the whole tragic component of the Doctor: he sincerely wants to live by the idea that everyone is important, that every life is precious, but he also deals with threats, issues (and enemies) that are WAY beyond humanity’s capacity, so humanity ends up being prey just because the Doctor likes them (cough, cough, the Master's schemes, cough, cough). And now I'm talking too much, whoops :P I hope I don't come off as pushy or impolite, let me know if it's the case.
1) I place the responsibility for bad things happening on the people doing the bad things, not the people trying to stop them. That goes for super heroes as well as the Doctor. The aliens invading Earth in Avengers, the Family in this story, they all could have chosen to take a different path. Instead, they chose death and destruction, so, in the immortal words of Dalek Sec, death and destruction chose them. Or followed them, which is more accurate.
2) The fact that the people close to the Doctor get caught in the crossfire as he tries to defend the Earth/the universe/just do the right thing for crying out loud is definitely one of the chief tragedies of his life. But again, the only actions he is responsible for are his own. Feeling responsible for what everyone else does around him is one of his chief mental pathologies. It isn’t healthy. He can’t control what the rest of the universe does, even though sometimes it seems like he can.
And honestly, the world is a better place for that fact. What if the Doctor had a bad day? Would we want him to have the ability to control everyone else? Would we want--saints preserve us--a Doctor with Kilgrave’s ability?
3) Joan’s reason for launching that accusation at him was almost entirely from anger. She was grieving for John, she was hurt that the Doctor wouldn’t turn back into John (the little hitch when he tells her no is heart-breaking), and she blamed him for John’s loss. Then he tried to convince her that she could travel with him--the Doctor--and maybe, possibly they’d be able to find what she’d had with John again. It was a wholly unfair suggestion, and she was understandably angry with him.
But he wouldn’t let it go! She said no, she tried to explain how much it would hurt to see him every day, wearing John’s face, and he kept going. So she used what she knew of John--he’s a fair man, he’s merciful, he never wants to be the cause of anyone else being hurt--and she used that against him. It’s not so much that it was really her reason for not travelling with him. Her reason is that it was a bloody stupid idea in the first place and the Doctor never should have asked. She accuses him of being responsible for those deaths--of negligently, recklessly causing people to die--because she knows it will hurt and get him to leave her alone.
And honestly, I don’t blame her for that, much. In the context of the story, the line works. It’s in character, and it’s exactly the kind of painful low blow people would shoot when they’re hurting like she is. I hurt for him when I see how hard he takes her words, but I understand why she said it and it’s good writing.
What bothers me about it is how the fandom has latched onto it as fact. That the Doctor was wrong to attempt mercy, that he does carry the blame for those deaths. I’ve read a lot--a lot--of Human Nature AUs, and the idea comes up frequently. Not just that the Doctor mistook the Family’s tenacity, but that he was just flat-out wrong to not face them head-on. It also comes up in meta when this story is discussed, along with blaming the Doctor for taking Martha to rural England in 1913 when she’d be forced to be a maid, despite the fact that the TARDIS chose the location, not the Doctor. (That’s a completely different rant on how the writers purposely chose settings that would be difficult for Martha b/c “drama.”)
