Howling:Theories about Clara

 was. . . ''insert brief lead here and use past tense throughout article. See the Tardis:Tardis Manual and Layout guide if you have questions.''

I've seen a few different far off theories about Clara Oswin Oswald, thought we should have a good place to discuss them. This one was posted by User:Stormystormageddon:

Is it possible that Clara Oswin Oswald might be CAL? User:Stormystormageddon Think about it, they both exist across different time periods, there can be multiple versions of them, and they can create there own reality per say. With Clara it was the crashed spaceship where she made soufflés and for CAL, it was the Library. This is just a theory but any thoughts?

She could be a new version of the Bad Wolf meme, too. I've had some odder thoughts, too. What about you guys? --ComicBookGoddess ☎  17:25, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

I've seen this theory elsewhere and I don't think it's very likely. For starters, CAL is short for Charlotte Abigail Lux, not some combination of Clara, Oswin, and Oswald, like every other one of her forms. I also just think it would be a rubbish story line. CAL's story is over. I don't think they should ruin that beautiful ending by twisting it up with the rest of this Clara mess. Also, that would mean people would start doing the reverse of the whole "every new character could be the Rani" thing by instead going "every old character could be Clara". So, while it's possible that this could happen, I think it's unlikely the showrunners would actually do it, and I personally don't think it would make a very good plot twist. Imamadmad (Contact me) 06:09, March 28, 2013 (UTC)

Clara is Latin for "bright." Lux is Latin for "light." Clara and lux are often found together in Latin of all periods, prose and poetry.

I agree with Imamadmad. I'm only surprised that I've not yet encountered anyone suggesting that Clara is the Rani, despite the drastic difference between Clara's apparent reincarnation with the same looks & personality -- & even turn of phrase -- & Time Lord regeneration with different looks & personality. Clara is not only a new character but a new kind of character. --89.242.64.79talk to me 10:58, March 28, 2013 (UTC)

I think she's human, but there's something else that will be going on with her that caused a time splintering. I even saw somebody this week theorise she's the future child of River and the Doctor.--ComicBookGoddess ☎  18:17, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose it was inevitable that someone would suggest that but it doesn't fit. A child of theirs would be able to regenerate & Clara can't. If she could, she would have done so in The Snowmen.

I think you're right about her being human but with some extras, although we need more information before we can go further with our theories. From the previews of The Bells of Saint John (not the prequel with the swings), it seems we'll learn a bit more tomorrow but I'd be surprised if we learned enough in one episode to solve the mystery.

The prequel with the swings suggests reincarnation. It makes it look as if each Clara is born & grows up normally, without memories of previous lives. That's about all it conveys, however, except a rather forward personality. "Don't talk to strange men" is advice she's unlikely to follow. --89.241.69.66talk to me 20:33, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

From The Bells of Saint John, we have a small part of an answer & more questions.

The part answer is that Clara's computer skills are an unintended gift from the Great Intelligence. Is her (seeming) reincarnation the same? The Great Intelligence is associated with Tibet (The Abominable Snowmen, 1967), as is reincarnation.

A new question is: Who was "the woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS phone number & told her it was the best helpline "in the universe"? It could be River but it could also be someone else that we haven't yet met. It could even be Clara (disguised so she didn't recognise herself), at a later point in her timeline.

It looks as if the Doctor took young Clara's advice to find somewhere quiet to sit & think. Did the leaf in Clara's book come from the park where they met in the prequel? (I was 89 before but I'm 78 now.) --78.146.187.106talk to me 12:09, March 31, 2013 (UTC)

I just watched the Bells of St John last night, and I thought of a theory. Maybe Futuristic Clara and Modern Clara are the same person, but just in different points in their timeline. There were a lot of hints/clues in the episode that made me think this, such as the mention of 'Nina' (Nina is Futuristic Clara's girlfriend at one point in her timeline), Clara gaining genius computer skills from the Great Intelligence (Futuristic Clara is a genius with computers), and Clara making up the nickname 'Oswin' (Futuristic Clara referred to herself as Oswin). Also, Futuristic Clara seemed rather familiar with the Doctor in Asylum of the Daleks. It wouldn't be surprising if she had met him earlier in her timeline. Chericola ☎  23:41, March 31, 2013 (UTC)

Modern Clara did make up the name "Oswin", though the Doctor had already said it to her when he arrived at the Maitlands' front door (he asked "Clara Oswin Oswald?" & she responded "Just Clara Oswald."). However, Victorian Clara's full name was shown on her gravestone as "Clara Oswin Oswald". We have, of course, no way of knowing if Victorian Clara had computer skills, because there were no computers available for her to use.

Futuristic Clara had access to the information about the Doctor held in the Daleks' pathweb (until she deleted it all) & she showed no sign of recognising his face when she first saw it in Asylum of the Daleks. Also, Futuristic Clara didn't use the name Clara at all, calling herself "Oswin Oswald" only.

The Nina reference in The Bells of Saint John may be significant but that Nina was a friend of Angie Maitland, not of Clara, & that suggests (though it doesn't prove) that that Nina is about Angie's age -- much younger than Clara. Futuristic Clara (Oswin Oswald) spoke of having had a "crush" on Nina, which suggests (though again it doesn't prove) that "her" Nina would have been about the same age as Oswin was or perhaps a bit older.

We still don't have enough information to figure out how these versions of Clara/Oswin are connected -- which is presumably because Moffat doesn't want us to have enough. --78.146.184.78talk to me 16:38, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

I saw this on Facebook the other day and thought it was interesting, especially the part connected with Clara. Is there anything else notable lately in narrative about the number 23 which could be connected to Clara? Has she missed 23 with anything else? Or do you think it's just an in joke for fans because of November? Imamadmad (Contact me) 09:27, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

She also missed 16 in the list of ages. The 23 thing almost certainly is an in joke for fans but it could be more than that, too. The "Doctor Who?" thing is an in joke, too, & is also much more.

Because Clara's computer skills are a result of her temporary upload by the Great Intelligence, I harbour suspicions that her apparent reincarnation might also be connected with the GI. There were comments in The Bells of Saint John about "immortality -- but fatal" & so on. The GI is associated with Tibet (The Abominable Snowmen), which is associated with reincarnation. Additionally, we've had recent references to two other GI stories: The Web of Fear was set in the London Underground in 1967 (map on box in The Snowmen). That incident was one of the things that triggered the formation of UNIT & it involved Colonel (later Brigadier) Lethbridge-Stewart. Kate (Lethbridge-)Stewart, his daughter, was introduced in the spinoff Downtime, the 3rd GI story, which has some similarities to The Bells of Saint John. Downtime had the GI making use of a former companion, Victoria Waterfield, who came from the Victorian era but settled in the 20th century when she left the Doctor. The story also featured both the Brig & Sarah Jane Smith. It looks as if the GI is going to be a recurring adversary for a while, so a connection between it & the mystery of Clara wouldn't be surprising. (I was 89 & then 78 but I'm 2 now.) --2.96.29.117talk to me 11:59, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Now, 23 is popping up a lot, and that's the anniversary, but it could be other things as well. There are a lot of interesting pseudoscientific references and coincidences with 23, just google 23 numerology or 23 enigma. Its not just skipping the age, though. The Doctor "bumped her elbow" with the password, and she went from 23 to 24, which might be significant. VicClara has shown demonstrably more than human control of telepathic fields - Remember, she could melt the snowmen alone, and the telepathic focus of the ice governess - the little girl - couldnt do it herself. The Doctor even thought it was the whole family crying that melted the snow into a rain of tears, but from cinematography we were meant to conclude that it was just Clara's tear. Since Dalekwin was joking about Nina, who knows if she actually dated her equivalent Nina, but surely just having the name around her is significant. I also noticed that in the scene where the Doctor was confronting Dalek Oswin about her delusion, she was using different words, but she was sobbing about not knowing where she was. Speaking of cinematography, whenever this comes to a head, we can be sure that there will be lots of flashing red lights. I actually can't wait for Cold War, not because of Ice Warriors, but because of Clara. And I think we've seen how they'll be using Clara in the narrative - she challenges him in a way that no one, not even River, does. ("I wish that I was more like that.") She makes him think, and reveal more of his thinking, just by being her own incredible enigma. I also think that whatever it is, the Great Intelligence is going to be key in whatever happens. And I find it quite curious that the Doctor didn't recall the name, especially with the subway map involved.

It's interesting to note that Modern Clara has a father and mother that the Doctor has spoken to or seen, and he's seen her as a child, Indicating that this particular Clara has a history like a normal person. We don't have any independent confirmation that the other two have a fully fleshed existence - the publican says VicClara doesn't tell them where she goes and doesn't mention family, and her other employer is even more snowed (Hee hee) and we mostly know Dalekwin's past from her own words - basically we can only confirm that she climbed out of that ship by ladder. She could be some kind of temporal clone or something, created by an event yet to happen in the Doctor's timeline. I suspect that we've been shown the original Clara, now, though.

Oh, and ModClara didn't quite hear that middle bit that the Doctor said (Oswin) and when she asked him to repeat he did his usual change the subject thing. She might have subconsciously remembered it, who knows.--ComicBookGoddess ☎  16:08, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

ComicBookGoddess, "ModClara didn't quite hear that middle bit that the Doctor said (Oswin)": She did hear it when he turned up at the front door. She said, "Just Clara Oswald," (i.e., no middle name) because she'd heard it.

However, if we combine that with some of your other points, we come up with this:


 * 1. Modern Clara is the only one with a family background that we know at all. As you point out, we saw her mother in the prequel & her father spoke to the Doctor in the episode (albeit off screen).


 * 2. Modern Clara originated the phrase "run you clever boy and remember" as a password mnemonic (even though, ironically, she couldn't remember the word "mnemonic").


 * 3. Modern Clara is the one who gained the computer skills (thanks to the Great Intelligence).


 * 4. Modern Clara, probably prompted by the Doctor's earlier use of the name, adopted "Oswin" as a username.


 * 5. Modern Clara was successfully uploaded (at the 2nd attempt) after all this, so if a copy of the uploaded version was somehow retained by the GI (or by something else) despite the downloading near the end of the episode, that copy would have all these features.

This suggests that Modern Clara is the original & that Victorian Clara & Futuristic Oswin are both later incarnations. As I said above, we can't tell whether or not Victorian Clara had computer skills because there was nothing for her to use them on. Modern Clara only became consciously aware of them when something happened (conversation with the Doctor) to draw her attention to them. The skills could have been present in Victorian Clara but unknown to her because nothing happened to make her aware of them.

At a guess (& it is only a guess), I'd say the 3 incarnations we've seen have appeared in reverse order in the character's timeline & the sequence from her point of view is: Clara Oswald (Modern) --> Clara Oswin Oswald (Victorian) --> Oswin Oswald (Futuristic). --2.101.51.235talk to me 21:39, April 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Clara knew the Doctor said something in the middle, but she didn't catch what. The full passage is, "Just Clara Oswald. What was that bit in the middle?" The Doctor just continues babbling.
 * More important to solving the mystery, the Doctor has intersected with both.
 * Clara doesn't originate it. She's just the one we hear say it. She asks Angie Maitland how she's supposed to remember the password, and then it cuts away to the Doctor, implying that the Maitlands came up with it.
 * No doubt.
 * ...And I'm sure the Daleks who attempted to convert her preferred that mechanical username.
 * Good point, however, as the Doctor used the word soul I suspect there's some other kind of thing that'll need to go on.

I actually don't think that there will end up being a linear sequence to her. Her incarnations have been so isolated, except to the Doctor. I feel time-breaking shenanigans on the way. The two special abilities that she'd shown really strike me as significant. Oooh. Perhaps she's got a little piece of the Intelligence in her. At least it explains why Victoria.--ComicBookGoddess ☎  22:53, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Clara could well have got the phrase from Angie Maitland, rather than inventing it herself. (I'd not spotted the significance of the cut.) If so, that strengthens the case for Modern Clara being the original, because the phrase is then like the computer skills -- something that was given to Modern Clara.

She might not have registered the "Oswin" consciously, when the Doctor said it. Her behaviour when she made up the username suggests she didn't. That same behaviour also suggests it had stayed with her, rather like a subliminal suggestion. Even if she really did make it up, though, & it wasn't prompted (even subconsciously) by the Doctor having said it, "Oswin" is still something that was new to Modern Clara, again like the computer skills.

If the Daleks had preferred the username, that ought to have made her hang on to Clara as part of her human identity. She hung on very tenaciously to all kinds of other things (soufflé-making, for example) to retain her human identity & names are important. In any case, the Daleks would have been more likely to prefer no name at all. We've only ever encountered 4 Daleks who had names: the Cult of Skaro.

"I actually don't think that there will end up being a linear sequence to her." I did say the sequence was only a guess. We certainly don't have enough to go on to decide with any confidence whether or not there's a linear sequence or, if there is, what that sequence is.

We don't even know if there are more incarnations of Clara that we (& the Doctor) have yet to encounter. It's by no means impossible (especially with Moffat in charge) that, after travelling with Modern Clara for a while, the Doctor might run across a fourth Clara -- one who doesn't yet know him. I'm sure Moffat & company would have fun with that situation.

"Perhaps she's got a little piece of the Intelligence in her." Possible. It's also possible that we'll find the situation with Clara/the GI to be similar to the situation with Ace/Fenric -- an old enemy of the Doctor trying to plant a companion on him in order to use that companion (without her knowledge or consent) against him.

"At least it explains why Victoria." It looks as if part of that sentence is missing. At any rate, I don't know what you meant by it, so please clarify. --2.101.51.235talk to me 00:36, April 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Just making the point - she didn't consciously get the name from the Doctor, she easily could have come up with it herself. Likewise, it's suggestive that she may not have hit up the spoonhead without the Doctor - although her other skip of 23 says maybe she would have. That means without him, no super computer skill package. Without him, death... Again. She would have died those other two deaths without him too.


 * As for deliberate trying to involve her on the part of GI? Well, we already know that's not true. Simeon only had one place to get the Ice Governess, and Kizlet made her decision without consulting. Rather, I think it's much more likely that it's a decision made by... Well, whoever ends up pulling the strings, maybe even Clara herself... to make sure she's in place to do great things for the Doctor - like remove him from the pathweb and shock him out of his sulk so that the world doesn't end.


 * Heh. Maybe the lady in the shop was Jenny. Heh.


 * I seriously wouldn't put it past Moffat to kill her again, it's pretty much been four times so far, right? She's WAY behind Rory.


 * Sorry, I had to go answer alarm bells and chattering radio. "At least a connection to the Intelligence explains why Victorian Clara had such a clear power over the snow" it would have said. --ComicBookGoddess ☎  02:34, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Something that may be important about Clara? The 16 thing. Count backwards, and that means that she didn't put her age in the book in 2005. The year the show was rebooted. Interesting, at least, put possibly just a simple easter egg. --71.201.148.238talk to me 07:48, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

71: I'd not gone as far as working out which year went with which age but you're right. What's more, if she's 24 now, she was born in 1989, the last year of the classic series. Victorian Clara's birthday was 23 November. We don't yet know Modern Clara's birthday.

ComicBookGoddess: The GI couldn't have planted Modern Clara but that doesn't rule out the trick using a 4th Clara. Although each Clara has died before we've seen another, so far, we can't assume we'll encounter a 4th Clara only after we've seen Modern Clara die. What I had in mind, though I didn't make it clear, was a situation in which the Doctor meets a 4th Clara but doesn't initially realise she's another incarnation because, in his timestream, Modern Clara hasn't yet died. That 4th Clara could be living either in the past or in the future, as far as the calendar is concerned. As the Doctor repeatedly reminded Modern Clara, the TARDIS is a time machine.

As far as we so far know, Jenny doesn't have the phone number of the TARDIS -- but, of course, time travel is involved & she could get the number in a later episode & then go back in time to give it to Clara. The same is true of others, though, including female characters we've not yet met at all. Nonetheless, I still think that River's the most likely culprit.

"At least a connection to the Intelligence explains why Victorian Clara had such a clear power over the snow": Yes, it would explain that. What confused me was that, in the spinoff Downtime, it was Victoria Waterfield who was being used by the GI, so the incomplete sentence might have been going to say something about her.

We've only seen Clara die twice, not 4 times, so she really is only a beginner by Rory's standards. (I've been 78 & 2 but I'm back to 89 now.) --89.240.253.38talk to me 09:29, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

From my first viewing of The Rings of Akhaten, I didn't get much information that seems to bear on the mystery of Clara, although there was more about her family. One possible hint was her suspicion that the TARDIS doesn't like her -- because Clara couldn't get in. That might just be that the doors were locked & Clara didn't know she needed a key. However, it might be more than that. We'll need to wait for any further signs that the TARDIS is uneasy about her, because that could be an indication of a continuing connection to the Great Intelligence (or, indeed, some other adversary). I may, of course, spot other things when I watch the episode again. (I've been 89, 78 & 2 but I'm 92 this time.) --92.17.167.50talk to me 19:54, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, good point. And who was one other person the TARDIS didn't like? Jack. What was he famous for? Not staying dead. And now we have another character who won't stay dead. Connection? Maybe. Imamadmad (Contact me) 07:42, April 8, 2013 (UTC)

That had occurred to me, too. As I say, it's still too early to be sure of it. After all, if she doesn't know she needs a key, Clara might be wrong about the TARDIS not liking her. (I've been 89, 78 & 92 but I'm 2 again now.) --2.101.62.25talk to me 09:05, April 8, 2013 (UTC)

Somebody on Facebook pointed me to this. Rose is coming back for the 50th, so could the Bad Wolf have anything to do with this? Imamadmad (Contact me) 06:24, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

The Bad Wolf had the power of the Vortex & could have effects throughout time & space, as shown by the words "Bad Wolf" showing up all over the place & by Jack's innumerable revivals from death. Even though, in Rose's own timeline, she was the Bad Wolf for only a matter of minutes, she could have had a huge influence. It was really the Bad Wolf that did for Abaddon in TW: End of Days, though Jack was the intermediary, so the Bad Wolf is extremely powerful. And, above all, she was very, very determined to protect the Doctor.

However, I'm much less convinced by the Clara aspects of that theory, especially as it says nothing about the Great Intelligence. --2.101.48.161talk to me 11:51, April 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * I wasn't thinking it would be the exact same as the Bad Wolf scenario. I think it's going to be a similar effect with a different cause. It might even be a plot by a future version of the Great Intelligence. I think Clara's giving off a Red Riding Hood vibe.
 * I think we learned some very interesting thing in Rings. Firstly, the way the shot was juxtaposed with the book makes it look to me like Ellie died when Clara was 16. That makes sense, if Ellie and then her other friend died and she skipped writing the age in.
 * I hadn't made that connection with Jack, I was only thinking of the prejudice angle. And she had no problem with Jack before Bad Wolf happened. Whatever is going on with Clara, I seriously got the indication that most of it is happening in the future.
 * Here's what I think. The TARDIS can see past, present, and future, all at once. She never wants to give the Doctor back - so she doesn't want to land anywhere that she can't foresee the Doctor surviving to get back to her. She didn't want to land on The Impossible Planet, either, and that was a dern close call. I think that she can foresee that something about being around Clara in the future is going to harm the Doctor. She even let that Ice Governess enter the Control Room to drag her out. She can open and close her own doors - snap of the fingers - so, yeah, I think she doesn't like Clara - who is being shown as rather more unconsciously perceptive than any random person should be, by rights.--ComicBookGoddess ☎  03:13, April 10, 2013 (UTC)

ComicBookGoddess, "the way the shot was juxtaposed with the book makes it look to me like Ellie died when Clara was 16": You don't need to guess based on that. The date on Ellie's grave was 2005, which is 8 years ago. Clara is 24 now, so she would indeed have been 16 then. The other age she missed was 23, one year ago, & (as you say) that also seems to be associated with a death: the friend who was the mother of Angie & Artie Maitland. It'd be interesting to know if that's the same friend we saw with Modern Clara in the brief "flashforward" at the end of The Snowmen, when Modern Clara stood beside Victorian Clara's grave & said she didn't believe in ghosts.

I don't think it's the same as Bad Wolf, either. The theory that was pointed out to Imamadmad & to which she provided a link (above) was basically saying that Clara could be some kind of emissary of Rose/Bad Wolf. That's what doesn't convince me. (I was 2, earlier.) --89.242.73.175talk to me 05:22, April 10, 2013 (UTC)

The episode where Clara visits the rings begins with the song "Ghost Town" by The Specials and ends with Clara saying "I'm not going to compete with a ghost". Any other ghost references? 123.243.210.42talk to me 10:30, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Apart from those, I've only spotted the one at the end of The Snowmen. --2.99.197.152talk to me 09:22, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

First, Clara has nothing to do with Jack Harkness. Jack was a Davies character and has made no appearances in Series 5, 6 or 7. River Song is the only Companion-type character who Moffatt has made use of. I would be surprised to see Captain Jack back on Doctor Who but, who knows, never say "never".

One thing I am certain of is that the mystery of Clara will be stretched into Series 8, it will not be wrapped up in Series 7. Undoubtedly, there will be some cliffhanger this Spring that will give viewers an extra hint but there is just too much potential in Clara's mystery to explain it all in the remaining 5 episodes.69.125.134.86talk to me 16:44, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

69, "Jack was a Davies character and has made no appearances in Series 5, 6 or 7": True but thoroughly misleading. All involved have said that Moffat wanted Captain Jack to be in A Good Man Goes to War & the only reason that didn't happen was that John Barrowman's schedule didn't allow it (he was busy with Miracle Day at the time). River may be the only one Moffat has made use of but she's not the only one he's wanted to make use of. A reappearance by Captain Jack is highly likely, as long as the schedule can be made to work.

123: There ought to be plenty of ghost references in the next episode (Hide)! --89.240.248.227talk to me 00:55, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

On the point of the Clara mystery not being resolved, it has been said by I think it was Moffat himself that the Clara mystery will be resolved by the end of this series. So, the Clara Conundrum probably won't be continued into series 8. Imamadmad (Contact me) 03:43, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

"Moffat himself" has occasionally been known to lie about such things. However, we know of one good reason why he's quite likely to want the Clara mystery resolved by then -- the 50th anniversary. In that episode, the emphasis more-or-less has to be on the Doctor, without the kind of lingering distractions that an unresolved Clara mystery would cause.

It seems to me that we're likely to find that the resolution of the Clara question (whatever the resolution turns out to be) raises further questions about the Doctor, in preparation for the anniversary. That's a guess, of course, not inside knowledge, but it would fit Moffat's approach: never answer a question without opening another question in the process. --2.101.59.19talk to me 09:07, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

89: Why would a reappearance by Captain Jack be "highly likely"? It's been over 3 years since he was on the show, back when Davies was the showrunner. What is your source? River was Moffat's creation so it's not a surprise that she would be the only returning character in 2010-2013 era. 63.143.228.74talk to me 21:53, April 19, 2013 (UTC)

63: Did you actually read the bit where I said, "All involved have said that Moffat wanted Captain Jack to be in A Good Man Goes to War & the only reason that didn't happen was that John Barrowman's schedule didn't allow it..."? If you did read it, why are you asking? If you didn't read it, why didn't you?

Also, "River was Moffat's creation": So was Captain Jack. His first appearance was in The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances by -- guess who -- Steven Moffat. --89.241.75.49talk to me 09:14, April 20, 2013 (UTC)

By the way, 63, if you're doubting that Moffat wanted Captain Jack to be in A Good Man Goes to War, take a look at the article for that episode, especially here & the associated footnote, which gives the source as being Moffat himself. --89.240.253.83talk to me 18:32, April 20, 2013 (UTC)

To get back to the topic:

In Hide, we saw more of the somewhat uneasy relationship between Clara & the TARDIS. It was bad enough that the TARDIS again shut her out but the ship used Clara's own image for the voice interface & produced a downright bitchy explanation for doing so. She then gave Clara a couple of extremely rough rides into the pocket universe.

We also saw that the Doctor is still investigating Clara -- to the extent that he took them to Caliburn House specifically to consult Emma, an empath, about her. That doesn't seem to have got him (or us) any very useful information, which means that, if there's anything odd in Clara's mind, it's well hidden. --2.96.23.94talk to me 09:32, April 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Or in the future. "It's the classic Bad Wolf scenario." ;) You did notice the "Hungry Like the Wolf" reference in Cold War? They may be throwing away the problems between the TARDIS and Clara, I mean, she did let her in for the ride, and the Doctor said she was like a cat, buuuuuut.... I hope not. I hope the TARDIS dislikes her because of whatever she is going to do in the future.
 * In any case, and speaking of non-narrative information, as much as I'd like one, Barrowman announced that he won't be in the anniversary special, and he's villianing in another franchise, isn't he? Man, I'd love to see him make a surprise appearance, but it will be a surprise to me. With the reveal that The Doctor's Name will be the last episode, it seems like they'll settle Trenzalore before finishing up with Clara's mystery. And maybe that's as it should be - if she really is the only mystery that interests the Doctor right now, we need his interest to be rekindled before the mystery drops out of her. --ComicBookGoddess ☎  02:45, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

ComicBookGoddess: You're right, it could be something that's in Clara's future. The TARDIS didn't seem to have a problem with Victorian Clara but that might be because Victorian Clara's future didn't include travelling in the TARDIS -- it didn't include very much of anything, in fact. And Oswin (Futuristic Clara) never got anywhere near the TARDIS. On the basis of what we've seen so far, Modern Clara seems to be the "main" Clara. Perhaps the Facebook theory that Imamadmad pointed out (above) was right that Victorian Clara & Oswin were emissaries but wrong about whose emissaries they were. Maybe they're Modern Clara's emissaries, for some reason that we've yet to discover. That's very definitely speculation, since "what we've seen so far" ain't very much, & I'm sure there's a lot more to come. Any theory, at this stage, has to be extremely tentative.

The TARDIS did let Clara in for the (very rough) ride -- but only after having used the voice interface with Clara's own image to tell her, in effect, "Yourself is the only person you'll really listen to." That's not exactly a friendly compliment.

Although the Doctor said the TARDIS was like a cat, she's been much quicker to accept most of the other "strays" the Doctor has brought home (as she herself described them in The Doctor's Wife). Rose Tyler may be a special case, because of the "Bad Wolf", & River another special case, because she's "a child of the TARDIS", but Martha, Donna, Amy & Rory were all accepted quite rapidly. The same goes for most, though not all, of the classic series companions.

On Barrowman/Captain Jack: I've no inside information about whether or not he will appear again, let alone when. All I can go on is the knowledge that Moffat has said he wanted him for A Good Man Goes to War but the schedule didn't permit (& others have said the same) & that Captain Jack, like River, is a Moffat creation dating back to the RTD era. No matter how much Moffat might want to bring him back & no matter how much Barrowman might want to play him again in DW, it can only happen if the schedule can be made to work (as I said before), & that isn't at all guaranteed. Barrowman is, after all, in considerable demand for other things. --2.96.24.223talk to me 07:22, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS (TV story)
So, what new information did we find out about Clara in this episode? That there are different versions of her for some reason in the TARDIS who are horribly disfigured? Is this only Clara or did the TARDIS hold future and past versions of other Companions because of some timeline hiccup? Why would they be in the TARDIS and did the Doctor know they were there?

According the episode summary on the Wiki, it appears that Clara forgot everything the Doctor said about there being different versions of her but I'll have to look at the transcript to see if this fact is, indeed, reflected in the episode. 63.143.218.107talk to me 20:22, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Between this episode and Hide, we learned that "this" Clara is the original, normal, no-frills Clara. We also learn that this one will die as well, though it is not clear if the doctor has chagned that future outcome or not. Whosethebestwho ☎  04:38, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

This Clara -- called "Modern Clara", above, to distinguish her from Oswin Oswald ("Futuristic Clara") & "Victorian Clara" -- does seem to be the original & isn't yet whatever it is that she'll become.

As far as I could tell from Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS, the death referred to there was her death in the TARDIS, which the Doctor did prevent by rewriting time. That doesn't mean there's no other death awaiting her in the future. In fact, if she were to remain "normal, no-frills Clara", a future death would be a certainty (eventually), since normal humans don't live forever.

From what we've seen so far, I suspect that the way the "mystery of Clara" will be resolved will be by showing us what happens to her to make her something different from a normal human & I suspect it'll happen in the finalé. This is only my guess, however.

Clara's reaction to learning the Doctor's name (now forgotten again) was interesting. She didn't go "OMG! That's who you are!" It seemed to matter to her only because the Doctor had concealed it. It was a bit like someone (25 years ago) discovering Ace's real name -- interesting because previously unknown but not of cosmic significance. Of course, Clara knows next to nothing about the Time Lords &c, so the Doctor's name might be far more significant to someone who did have that kind of background knowledge. --89.242.73.246talk to me 12:05, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

In regards to the horribly disfigured creatures aboard the Tardis in this episode, only one of them was Clara and I think we are meant to assume that the others are the Van Baalen brothers and the Doctor after being consumed and burned by the exploding engine in one timeline. So, I don't believe any likenesses of other companions were stored on the Tardis. [Unsigned but appears to be 4.59.85.5 21:51, April 30, 2013 (UTC)]

That was my interpretation of the creatures, too. We did hear other companions, however, including Susan explaining how she'd thought of the name TARDIS, & that was presumably some kind of leakage from the past. We also know from previous episodes that the TARDIS retains a visual record of past companions. She used the images of Rose, Martha & Donna for her voice interface in Let's Kill Hitler, before finally settling on the image of the young Amelia Pond (who was never inside the TARDIS until she was significantly older). In all those cases, as with Clara's image in Hide, the images were just insubstantial holograms. The creatures in Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS were much more than that. --89.240.243.241talk to me 01:41, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

i may have this in the wrong place in this forum but in a continuation of the missing ages theory above (sorry if this has already been said)

in claras diary two years were missing from her list (the doctor has read this it is now a fixed point). my theory is that in Modern claras future two years of her life are taken out of her time stream and those years are sent to different points in time victorian times and the dalek asylum as with both occasions she has been in that place for a year. my theory is that the doctor sends her back and forward to these events to make sure things happen ie. erassing him from the pathweb and bringing him out of retierment after the loss of the pond' 87.83.10.218talk to me 11:09, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it's not a "fixed point" but an "established event", though I don't think the difference (which is fairly abstruse, anyway) is likely to be relevant, because the Doctor can't change either of them.

The two missing ages in the book (which isn't a diary & used to belong to her mother) are both associated with deaths: her mother's (16) & her friend's (23). Of course, that doesn't mean that those ages couldn't be missing for some reason other than -- or as well as -- the deaths. Neither of the "other Claras" we've seen was 16 years old, however. (I was 89 earlier.) --2.101.50.55talk to me 12:12, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

she could choose those years to be the two she looses because they are the years that feature deaths and are years that have meaning tko her like the leaf and ring in the rings of akhaten. and maybe if it was just the time that was taken from her rather than the actual year itself the version of her that would be copied would be the current version

apologies for the wrong terms being used couldnt remember the corect name 87.83.10.218talk to me 12:49, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem. They are a tad confusing.

As far as I can tell (& I've not had the benefit of Time Lord training), a "fixed point" is something nobody can change, without the disastrous kind of results seen in The Wedding of River Song, but an "established event" is something someone can't change because, in that person's timeline, it's already happened (or its consequences have). That was why the Doctor, in The Angels Take Manhattan, was upset by Amy reading out the bit about River's broken wrist -- it established that event in his timeline, so he couldn't then change it. If he'd not known about it, he might have been able to find a way to free her without that injury. From what he said to Donna in The Fires of Pompeii, he'd see when he encountered it that he couldn't (or, rather, that he mustn't) change a "fixed point", even if he'd no previous knowledge of the event.

To make matters still more confusing, he sometimes can change things that he knows have "already happened". He certainly did that in Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS, when he rewrote time to prevent the TARDIS being destroyed, Clara dying again & so on. Either the scriptwriters are inconsistent or there are factors involved that have never been made clear in the show -- maybe both.

And, of course, The Angels Take Manhattan introduced yet another confusingly similar idea: "fixed time", which Amy & Rory managed to create for themselves. Aaargh! I think my brain's beginning to melt! (Having been 89 & then 2, I seem to be 92 now.) --92.16.5.71talk to me 16:22, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * By the way, on your comment about the Doctor changing the events in Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS: the events that occurred where centred around a time crack in the TARDIS, so the permanence of all of those events was questionable anyways. It's like what happened with the time cracks surrounding Big Bang 2--everything that happened around the time of the cracks was erased, and paradoxes such as the older and younger Amelia Ponds crossing paths didn't affect anything. So the events in Journey are not necessarily fixed points. Just wanted to point that out! :) Milar Kayne ☎  17:46, May 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * That's true. The time cracks do change the rules. Although we can't figure out the rationale behind it (i.e., we don't really know what the new rules are), their behaviour is pretty consistent, showing that there actually are rules. It's not merely that the events aren't fixed points (things nobody can safely interfere with) but also that they're not properly established events (things the participants can't safely interfere with afterwards). --89.241.65.242talk to me 01:44, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

The Crimson Horror (TV story)
The most significant thing, as far as the ongoing Clara mystery is concerned, came at the end of the episode: The Maitland children, Angie & Artie, have worked out that Clara's a time traveller. "No, I was in Victorian Yorkshire..." (Oops!)

The question is, did they have help? They might be very bright but how did they even find those photos of Clara, let alone put the right interpretation on them? Most folk, finding a few photos like that, would think they were of someone else who happened to look like her, perhaps astonishingly like her, but just a "double". They'd not think it actually was her -- unless they'd also been given reason to believe time travel was possible.

If they did have help, the obvious culprit is the same "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS phone number. Books might also have helped -- books by, say, Amelia Williams & (possibly) Melody Malone. --89.240.242.21talk to me 19:56, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

That's exactly what I was thinking when I saw that scene. A little help from the mysterious woman in the shop would explain how the kids managed to find all those photographs. 87.102.91.126talk to me 20:55, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

And a few hints about time travel might have got dropped, too. Even sf fans, who might think of the explanation (Back to the Future & all that), wouldn't be likely to believe it strongly enough to come right out & accuse Clara of being a time traveller. Anyway, it looked as if the computer had been set up ready for her return, so that they could tell her they knew. That means they were already pretty certain. It also looked as if they knew when to expect her back. They seemed to have been nearby, waiting for her.

Personally, I want to watch that closing scene again, in case there's more to it than I saw the first time. (The entire episode's worth seeing again, anyway.) --89.240.242.21talk to me 21:35, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

I just have watched the closing scene again. You can scratch the "it looked as if". It was a set-up by Angie & Artie. The photos were already on the computer screen & the kids were lurking just out of sight, waiting for Clara to notice the photos, so they could spring their trap & blackmail her into getting them a trip in the time machine. --89.240.242.21talk to me 21:53, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Nasty thought: There's another possible candidate for the "woman in the shop", who might well be manipulating events to get Clara (&, it now seems, Angie & Artie) aboard the TARDIS, for malicious purposes. That's Kovarian. We saw her killed by Amy but that was in the disintegrating timeline caused by River's attempt to rewrite a fixed point. We don't know what happened to her in the restored timeline, so she could still be around. She might have learned the TARDIS phone number -- from River, while she was under the control of the Silence, or from other research into the Doctor -- & she certainly has a history of manipulating people & events.

If she simply took off her "eye-drive", she'd be much less distinctive & the Doctor might not easily recognise a description of her, even if Clara gave him one. The thing about wearing something as unusual as that eyepatch is that it tends to be the only thing people really notice. (Before her name was revealed, we all called her "the eyepatch lady".) Take it off & you're unrecognisable.

Why would she want to get the Maitland kids aboard the TARDIS? To put them in danger, so that the Doctor has to endanger himself to save them. She's already shown herself to be willing to use children as weapons against him, so that wouldn't be out of character for her. And, from the "Next Time" trailer at the end of this week's episode, Angie & Artie will be put in severe danger. --89.240.254.215talk to me 14:31, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not too concerned with how the children got the photos since I believe it's just a plot device to get the kids on the TARDIS. They also could have run into the police box or some other strategy to get them on the adventure.

What I find more implausible is that, on the internet, there is a photo posted of Clara and The Doctor with the crew of a Soviet submarine during the Cold War (TV story). First, this was a harrowing event with the Ice Warrior, not a holiday. Why would they be taking pictures, especially with such suspicious characters, why, if it did exist, would it be declassified and posted online in an easily accessible website?

Same goes with the photo from Hide (TV story) but in that case, it's just unlikely that a random photo from 1974 would be posted online.

But again, in the Doctor Who Universe, like all fictional worlds, the situation can be highly improbably but not impossible. Just the writers taking literary liberties to set up a scenario for future dramatic situations. 64.134.71.199talk to me 21:09, May 10, 2013 (UTC)

It could just be the programme-makers taking liberties. Remember Series 5, though, when the Doctor's jacket (in a scene in Flesh and Stone) was widely dismissed as a continuity error -- carelessness during filming -- but turned out to be a deliberate reference forward to the events of the finalé, The Big Bang. There are several improbable aspects to the scene with the photos. It is, undoubtedly, "a plot device to get the kids on the TARDIS" -- but that doesn't necessarily mean that's all it is. There might be more to it. If so, we'll find out eventually. --89.242.75.105talk to me 05:52, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Who said the photos were declassified? The website Mickey hacked into in World War Three to blow up the Slitheen was classified, but with the right person giving the right info, anything can be gotten into. If anything, the improbability just adds to 89's point about somebody having helped them get there.And yes, it is hard to imagine a photo being taken during the events of Cold War, but, I can't remember the photo clearly, could it have been taken during their trip back to the south pole after the events of that episode? For random one from Hide, as you put it, well, random old photos are all over the internet. It is the stumbling across the right old photo which is the tricky bit. Imamadmad (Contact me) 23:29, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Imamadmad, "could it have been taken during their trip back to the south pole after the events of that episode [Cold War]?": It does look as if it was taken after the action. It's obviously posed, with Clara, Captain Zhikov, the Doctor & Prof. Grisenko standing in a close group & a couple of ratings in the background. It looks, in fact, like a photo taken as a memento of the events. The photo has "1983 Firebird" handwritten on it & the date overlaps the white margin, as if written on a print that was later scanned into a computer.

By contrast, the photo from Hide looks unposed, as if taken during the action by one of the cameras that were part of Alec Palmer's investigative equipment. There's nothing written on it & the bottom margin is wider than the others, as you get when room's left for a caption but none has been added.

The photo of Victorian Clara also looks posed, as any photo from that era had to be ("snapshots" weren't technically possible), & could well have been taken before the action of The Snowmen, while Victorian Clara was in the Latimer household as "Miss Montigue", since she's wearing her governess clothes (& face). This one looks like there's part of a frame visible.

Artie said he'd found the Cold War photo "at school", though he didn't say if he found it during a lesson or not, but nothing was said about how they found the other two images.

The photos, BTW, are easy to examine closely on the BBC iPlayer, by stopping the playback at the right moments. --89.242.65.145talk to me 05:51, May 12, 2013 (UTC)