Howling:Who is Kovarian?

My current hypothesis is that she is a future version of Melody Pond, the one who willingly killed the Doctor. A sort of Valeyard to River Song. Boblipton talk to me 01:59, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that there is anything particularly mysterious about her. She is probably just a rather sadistic agent of the Silence. Besides, River can't regenerate anymore and we know how she dies.Icecreamdif talk to me 02:29, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

You may have already heard this, but "Madame Kovarian" when jumbled up spells "Mad Rani Makeover". This could be just Moffat teasing us but it's certainly possible she could be the Rani. 87.102.117.106talk to me 16:20, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

She could be Minnie Mouse, too, but I don't for a moment believe she is. --89.242.64.17talk to me 16:23, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

As a matter of interest, has anyone suggested yet that Elvis Presley might be the Rani? And if not, why not? --89.242.64.17talk to me 16:41, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't setting it in stone, 89, and I don't remember agreeing that the anagram was anything special. However Kovarian has more of a chance of being the Rani than most, what with the anagram and her personality beng similar and all that. 87.102.117.106talk to me 17:47, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Her personality isn't that similar. One thing the Rani wasn't inclined to do was work for (be subordinate to) someone else. She was very reluctant even to work with others as an equal. She liked to be the unquestioned boss. --89.242.64.17talk to me 18:22, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Kovarian's personality is a lot more similar than most to the Rani. It's really the anagram that most suggests it. And acknowledge that not all anagrams are red herrings - they have been useful in the past. I remember a YouTube video where this guy had worked out that "The Waters Of Mars" jumbled up is "Wars of the Master". A few months later and Hey Presto it's announced the Master is returning for the finale. Anagrams have been useful before, they could most definitely be useful again. 87.102.117.106talk to me 19:09, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

The only anagrams that I recall ever being significant in Doctor Who are when they used to change the names of the actors who played recurring villains in disguise. Waters of Mars may have been an anagram of "Wars of the Master," but the Master wasn't in that episode, he had nothing to do with that episode, and he wasn't waging any kind of war when he appeared. Madame Kovarian's personality is really nothing at all like the Rani's, except for the fact that they are both evil. As 89 said, her goal in life seems to be to serve the Silence, while the Rani is just interested in her experiments. The Rani would have considered the Silence to be an inferior species, worth little more than lab rats. Besides, if the Rani was choosing an alias, why would she choose one that refers to herself as mad? That's not even mentioning the fact that the Rani is a Time Lord, and therefore dead.Icecreamdif talk to me 21:23, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Anagrams: "Doctor Who" and "Torchwood". I believe the latter was originally used when they wanted to conceal that the programme involved was Doctor Who, to prevent spoilers getting out. Karen Gillan has also said the auditions before she was cast were billed as being for "Panic Moon" ("companion"). Like the anagrams in credits lists, though, these are out of universe anagrams. Of course, with enough ingenuity, all kinds of anagrams can be made to look significant to those who desperately want to see them as significant. Almost anything can be made to look like almost anything else, if enough effort is made. --2.101.54.163talk to me 23:08, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Still, I don't think that there are any in-universe anagrams like that, unless you believe that the Torchwood Institute is related to the question.Icecreamdif talk to me 01:05, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there are in-universe anagrams, either. I do think human ingenuity allied to a strong desire to find such anagrams will eventually find them even though they're not actually there. My point was that all the anagrams that we know really are there are out-of-universe. Torchwood started as out-of-universe, then sneaked in. I can't think of any others that have done that. --2.101.54.163talk to me 01:15, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Come to think of it, by the Madame Kovarian/the Rani logic, Torchwood ought to be the Doctor in disguise! --2.101.54.163talk to me 01:24, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Getting back on topic, Kovarian isn't really any more likely to be the Rani than any other female character. Anyway, since the episode went out of its way to tell us that Kovarian only died in an aborted timeline, I doubt we've seen the last of her.Icecreamdif talk to me 05:31, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

I've been looking over this anagram and I'm not getting it. "Madame Kovarian" has 4 a's and one r, while "Mad Rani Makeover" has 3 a's and 2 r's. Shambala108 talk to me 05:33, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I was just taking 87's word for it, but you're right. The anagram doesn't even work. Well, it works if you spell "makeover" as "makeova," but I don't think that that really counts. Well, I guess that means that we no longer have any incredibly compelling evidence that Kovarian is the Rani.Icecreamdif talk to me 07:33, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

just on the subject of anagrams, did you know tardis anagrams to "it's a Dr."? also, as i have said before (on another thread), i have come to ignore any suggestions that a character is either the rani or omega because they are always wrong! seriously, they aren't comming back any time soon. i believe kovarian is a totally new character who we have never seen before who works for the religious order known as the silence. we have no reason to assume otherwise. Imamadmad talk to me 13:18, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

What if the anagram is actually "Mad Rani Make Ova"!? That makes sense because an ova is a female sex cell, and we know Kovarian did some "interfering" with Amy. I'm not sure myself but it's quite an interesting theory. 87.102.117.106talk to me 17:16, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

What if it is? Kovarian's still not the Rani. Nor is Amy, River, Rory, the Doctor, Madge Arwell, Lilly Arwell, Rose Tyler or any of the other characters in the revived series. Your apparent obsession with obviously daft "Rani" anagrams is starting to make you look very much like a troll. --89.241.65.36talk to me 18:02, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Believe me, I've seen dafter theories. And besides, having a sense of humour doesn't make you a troll. 87.102.117.106talk to me 19:27, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

or "Rani make mad ova" since River is mad....if you think any possible person can be Rani why not just turn the universe into a 1 female universe by saying Rani has obtained unlimited regenerations after the war and travel back and forth between time to become every single female in the Universe. Apparent deaths of the female race are only due to the delay that occurs when a person has unlimited regenerations.--222.166.181.52talk to me 20:38, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Either way, on a more serious note, nobody can PROVE whether or not she is the Rani, so you can't completely dismiss the idea even if you hate it. 87.102.117.106talk to me 20:52, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Nobody can prove not everyone in the world is Rani so you can't dismiss the point regardless of how ridiculous it sounds. Nobody can prove the Doctor is not an extremely careful serial murderer who has all the time in the world to plot for genocide of mankind and all beings in the Universe so you can't dismiss the point. --222.166.181.230talk to me 21:29, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Why should we listen to you when you're just the Monk trying to confuse us? Boblipton talk to me 22:12, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

87, (1) "I've seen dafter theories": Anyone who's used the internet for any length of time has seen dafter theories. This one's still too daft to be worth persisting with. (2) "having a sense of humour doesn't make you a troll": Depends on what you think's funny. Genuine, undoubtable trolls (the abusive type) obviously think what they're doing is funny. (3) "nobody can PROVE whether or not she is the Rani": I can't prove the air in the room won't suddenly all collect in a solid block in one corner. It's statistically possible. It's also so vastly improbable that I can and do dismiss it as a matter of routine. To treat it as a real likelihood would be ludicrous. It's the same with the Kovarian/Rani "theory". (4) I can forgive Boblipton for conflicting with my edit because he's asking a good question. --2.101.60.159talk to me 22:30, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

All of the past Rani theories are obviosly red herrings. I mean, think about it. How do we know that any female character is the Rani. It has been suggested that Time Lords can change gender when they regenerate, so what if the Rani is...Dorium Maldovar. It fits perfectly. She/he was dealing with the monks in the prequel to A Good Man Goes to War. In actuality, the Rani/Dorium is trying to take revenge against the Doctor for ruining so many of her experiments, so she/he made up a story about Silence falling when the question is asked so that the Silence movement would kill the Doctor. None of you can prove that that isn't true, so you have to accept my theory.Icecreamdif talk to me 05:54, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

Except that it would be a very unsuccessful plan since Dorium is beheaded. Not to mentioned that he was going to sell a vortex manipulator to River who intended on saving the Doctor. Of course, there's always the possibility that Rani is brain-damaged after the War.--222.166.181.127talk to me 09:16, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

The Rani/Dorium assumed that River was still working for Kovarian, and he/she meant to be beheaded so that she could spend all her time sitting in a box and browsing the internet. Icecreamdif talk to me 09:20, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

uh...why would he sell it then? It would be a very stupid Rani too, thus brain-damaged --222.166.181.110talk to me 10:32, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

He/she didn't exactly sell it. If you'll recall, River put micro-explosives into Dorium's drink. The choice was basically give River the vortex manipulator or die. Icecreamdif talk to me 10:51, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

"Not to mentioned that he was going to sell a vortex manipulator to River " (222.166.181.127 09:16, January 12, 2012) --222.166.181.34talk to me 11:02, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

222, what's the point of repeating something that's already been shot down? It didn't work the first time, so it won't work the second. Repetition achieves nothing but (a) wasting space and time and (b) showing you've no further rational argument to support the assertion. Admittedly, Dorium being the Rani is (at least) as daft as any of the other loony-tunes ideas about characters being the Rani but either advance the discussion or ignore the idiocy. --89.241.69.185talk to me 12:00, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

because no one said Dorium sold the vortex manipulator. --222.166.181.126talk to me 13:02, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

You're still not making a comprehensible point. Try telling us what you're getting at, instead of being so cryptic. --89.241.69.185talk to me 14:10, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

In defense of my earlier comment, I was directly adressing Imamadmad and 89. Both had explicitly stated they knew she wasn't the Rani. They have no concrete proof. Unless they work for the BBC, which is unlikely, but no one can prove it's impossible, just like nobody can prove Kovarian is not the Rani. 87.102.117.106talk to me 16:32, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

Which earlier comment? And what has this got to do with Dorium and the vortex manipulator? You're still avoiding telling us what you're getting at. That suggests you already know it's nonsense but don't want the rest of us to know that, as well.

As for "no concrete proof" that Kovarian isn't the Rani: I've likewise "no concrete proof" that the air in this room isn't going to collect in a solid block in the corner. I'm entirely confident in asserting that it isn't going to do so, because I don't need concrete proof -- the thing is simply too improbable to be worth treating as a real possibility. It's theoretically possible; it ain't going to happen. It's also theoretically possible for Kovarian to be the Rani but she isn't. Nobody needs concrete proof that she isn't. You're the one who needs proof, which you don't have. You don't even have a tiny shred of actual evidence. I know that and so do you. --89.242.77.181talk to me 20:56, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

Okay then, if I was to make a desicion on Kovarian I'd say she's someone we havent met yet. It seems in series 6 that with the exception of the cybermats Steven was trying out a series with new villains. 87.102.117.106talk to me 21:35, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

I do hope that everyone realises that I don't actually believe that Dorium is the Rani. I was just showing how little sense it makes that Kovarian is the Rani by coming up with an absurd theory that has just as much to back it up. Kovarian is a new character, and the Rani died in the Time War.Icecreamdif talk to me 01:13, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, we know that. Please note that my comments weren't aimed at you and the person they were aimed at knew he/she was the target. Can we now get away from the Rani entirely, please? This discussion is about Kovarian and who she genuinely might be. --89.241.77.60talk to me 04:27, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was really speaking mainly to 222, who seems to argue with everything I say lately, even if it is just a joke. Anyway, I'm really not sure if there is much more to say on the subject, because I don't think that Kovarian is anyone other than Kovarian. She is creepy, sadistic, works for the Silence, and wears an eye patch, but that is pretty much all that we know about her right now.Icecreamdif talk to me 05:22, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

I either think she is a new villain or the Rani. No matter how much everyone shoots me down about it this forum is for speculation. If my opinion upsets you all that much that you spend half a page attacking me about it then I reccomend you create a discussion called 'attack 87's theory'. 87.102.116.67talk to me 16:33, January 13, 2012 (UTC)