From where do we know that she's a time lady?
So who was the woman in white?
- Thread starter Technobuilder
- Start date
From where do we know that she's a time lady?
Oh that got retcon'd out of continuity a while back, can't remember where, but it's definitely been swept under the carpet. The Doctor is fully Gallifreyan
I would prefer it to be Susan. It would be cooler to have a mature grandaughter with some gravitas alongside a goofy young grandfather and Claire Bloom is pretty awesome.
I believe that in the first Dr Who episode, Susan states that they are exiles from their people so it is implied that she is Gallifreyan, although she needn't be a Time Lady - in fact since she spent her time on the run, one could argue that it is quite unlikely that she is a Time Lady formally at least. Obviously, we don't know what happened to her after she stayed on Earth with no means of escaping. It seems odd that, given the life span of Gallifreyans, the Doctor has never tried to find her again.
She should definitely be Susan. It would be way more fun.
Given how popular the return of Sarah, K9, and Jo seem to have been I would be surprised if they don't bring back more characters from the past. Susan's origin requires no further explanation beyond, 'She's my grandaughter.'
I believe that in the first Dr Who episode, Susan states that they are exiles from their people so it is implied that she is Gallifreyan, although she needn't be a Time Lady - in fact since she spent her time on the run, one could argue that it is quite unlikely that she is a Time Lady formally at least. Obviously, we don't know what happened to her after she stayed on Earth with no means of escaping. It seems odd that, given the life span of Gallifreyans, the Doctor has never tried to find her again.
She should definitely be Susan. It would be way more fun.
Given how popular the return of Sarah, K9, and Jo seem to have been I would be surprised if they don't bring back more characters from the past. Susan's origin requires no further explanation beyond, 'She's my grandaughter.'
Though Romana's very good at regeneration; when she first regenerated, she chose her new appearance to look like Princess Astra (played by Lalla Ward). So it's quite possible she's regenerated several times, but on her latest regeneration she nostalgically chose to look like her first (Mary Tamm) or second (Lalla Ward) form.
okay here is what I don't understand.. if RTD said it is up to the viewer then why even say it is the Doctor's mum in the first place???
if it is up to the viewer, then I am going with the Doctor's long lost wifey.. who is in an older form, because she hasn't had to regenerate as often as the doctor due to hazardous actions..
Or it is the Doctor's oldest daughter jane..or maybe it is his teacher...
what a stupid thing to say..leave it up to the fans to make their own mind up..
fine it's susan, no no it is Romana in her new regeneration body...
yeah that's it..
there we go, just like RTD wants...leave it up to the fans.
There is, of course, conclusive proof that she isn't the Doctor's mother.
Given that all the mothers RTD writes end up shrieking harridens the woman in white seems quite sedate, ergo she isn't his mother.
All human mothers. This one's from Gallifrey
Because first, it's not that important to the story who the woman was. Second, some good writers leave things like that to the viewer/reader to a, keep the guessing (to be used again later) or b, so the viewer/reader can use their imagination. Try it sometime, instead of having to be hit over the head with every piece of information
There is, of course, conclusive proof that she isn't the Doctor's mother.
Given that all the mothers RTD writes end up shrieking harridens the woman in white seems quite sedate, ergo she isn't his mother.
All human mothers. This one's from Gallifrey
Yeah but I was just watching the TV movie and...
yea that little bit of reasoning makes sense, except it doesn't fit..
he said initially it is suppose to be the Doctor's mum..so right there he hits you on the head with it..
then contradicts it and says it is up to the viewer...
so a good writer hits you on the head with the obvious, and then leaves it up to your imagination??
But he said that to certain people and in his book. That's how he wrote the character. The fact that he never has her named/labeled in the episode itself means he left it open for interpretation. He saw the usefulness of that. Maybe Moffet wants to use her in S6? Who knows? But look what it did do. It has people (us) still talking about it over a year later.
That's something that writers strive for.
Nah, 600 year old Timelady Donna, after a regeneration (or more). That's why she went to Wilf in the church and only appeared to him on the TV. When Wilf asked who she was, the Doctor even looked towards Donna. That must be it.
no no no... it will be revealed that she is...
[his] father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate", but then immediately admits this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinship_terminologykinship means "absolutely nothing"
So I never knew RTD was a fan of spaceballs..
Donna is Wilf's granddaughter, which could signify that the unspoken answer is Susan, but she's with her own mother, which could mean that the answer is the Doctor's mum. Of course, it could also mean the Doctor's daughter...
Well, he looked at Sylvia then Wilf ( to get their attention) and then towards Donna, like saying, "you two, look over there. That's who the lady was".
I still say it's his mother, unless SM decides to say otherwise in a future episode of DW or RTD decides to tackle it in SJA or TW (more likely SJA).
I still say it's his mother, unless SM decides to say otherwise in a future episode of DW or RTD decides to tackle it in SJA or TW (more likely SJA).
Okay why put it in the book if you only meant to say it to certain people, and not have the fans hit on the head by it becoming public??
Maybe... or maybe he was just leaving it open for Moffat, but then why admit it is the Doctor's mother publicly at all?? it is clearly not Susan then..Photoman15 said:
Photoman15 said:
uhhh.. I thought writers strove to write meaningful stories in which contradictions and messages are clear and make you think deeply.. arguing on a fan site over the name of the character just frustrates me, and since RTD is producing a TV series, I don't see where him making me wonder makes me garner his respect as a writer, seeing as how the end of time wasn't a book that I read..it was a TV special..??
He left it open, fine..
he says it is the Doctor's mum.. also fine..
then in the same interview says leave it up to the viewers?? huh?
this makes RTD a super writer, how again??
ya know, I discuss the meaning behind some seriously screwed up art done by contemporary artist Dali..
Dali: Persistence of Memory (1931) - Museum of Modern Art, New York
and to this day, I still don't think that arguing the point of those crappy paintings make Dali a great artist because of the fact it is talked about to this day..Genghis kahn was a ruthless leader talked about to this day, but I still prefer Superman as a subject..RTD isn't exactly one of the top tier of writers in my opinion..
not when I have authors like C.S. Luis, and Tolkien.. not to mention the great value of Doctor who writers of past series:
Douglas Adams
Norman Ashby
Gerry Davis
Terence Dicks
Brian Hayles
and one of my personal favourites, Don Houghton (the mind of evil and Inferno)
I'll explain later
^
RTD left the Woman in White's identity for us to interpret exactly because of threads like this so we could generate discussion. While it is his intention that it was the Doctor's mother he doesn't care if you think it is Susan. That's the point.
Similar threads
