Howling:Is River Song human?

Occam's Razor - the reason that River Song knows the Doctor's true name, can drive the TARDIS, bounces through the timeline and has esoteric general knowledge of places/people is because she's not human - she could be a Time Lord or refugee from the time-locked Galifrey. Anyone care to discuss or refute?--ReTardis

She is a human Time Traveler, who at some point in her timeline, met a man called the Doctor. The full extent of their relationship is unknown, but clearly she is fascinated by him. She's no ordinary woman, that's for sure. She knows how to fly the TARDIS because she has traveled with him before, they have a history. But the Eleventh Doctor hasn't got ti that point in his timeline yet. A Time Traveler from the 51st century? Oh, sounds family - human Time Agents. But something happened between her and the Doctor clearly, which is part of the mystery. Don't push your look, the Time Lords are gone. She's a very mysterious human with a history with the Doctor. Just because she has a relationship of some bizzare sorts with the Doctor, doesn't make her a Time Lord. The weird nature of her knowledge stems from the fact that she can Time Travel (note: in the 51st century where she came from, humans did Time Travel) to any point and interact with any incarnation of the Doctor that she wants, gaining information from each one. She is, in a sense, studying him. Delton Menace 15:36, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily - at no point does she identify herself as human in either Silence or Forest. There's not enough info in the trailers to make that call on her species yet. She's got a "mysterious" history, yes, but there are a lot of different types of relationships outside marriage that a name and affection would have to be revealed - a birth for example....ReTardis

I do recall Moffat or Alex Kingston refering to her as human when reading about her in my TV guide in some interview. Plus, she died in FForest of the Dead, not regenerate. Delton Menace 15:54, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Right to kind of settle both arguments. Right now I think she may be neither Time-Lord or Human as nothing has really been confirmed and even though you Delton recall moffat and/or alex kingston refering to her as human this could mean anything inprevious stories they could be refering her to act human or look human doesn't neccesseeraly mean she is human and she may or may not be time lord because maybe the machine that killed her killed her to much for her regeneration kicked in like she said to the doctor about it burning up his hearts and him dying so we don't actually know if she is timelord or human. Time will tell and maybe we will get a result on saturday. -- Michael Downey 16:01, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

The fact that she physically "died" in Forest may not be indicative of her status as a native Gallifreyen. According to the section on time lords, only Time Lords who graduate from the Academy and receive the Rasillion Imprintur get the ability to regenerate and bond with a TARDIS. Regular natives of Gallifrey have a single heart and no ability to regenerate. Maybe River Song is actually the Doctor's daughter from a future liasion and that's why he had to give her his name - he's her parent! As for the theory of being a Time Agent, that's feasible. However, both Jack Harkness and John Hart wore their Vortex Manipulators - where is hers?--ReTardis

''Dude, River is NOT the Doctor's daughter, Amy is. No, but seriously, those theories are always wrong.'' In the same reading, I could have sworn Moffat refered to her as being the Doctor's wife, which is a very, very popular theroy. I think it went something life: "Most people assume River is the Doctor's wife, but she is more than just that." Eh, so it doesn't deny it, it sounds like he is saying she is. In an old Comic Con, Julie Gardner asked out loud if River was the Doctor's wife, and I think Moffat whispere the reply or something. That, or he didn't give a clear answer. Delton Menace 01:22, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

Alex Kingston definitively referred to River Song as being human a couple years ago. But what does that prove? It's possible that Moffat hadn't thought of making her anything but human 2 years ago, or that he had thought of it but hadn't decided, or even that he had decided but hadn't told her (so it wouldn't leak out, or so she wouldn't try to act "alien", or whatever).

So, that information isn't all that useful. If she were to stay the same thing today, after having filmed this season, that would be a different story. Even better if Moffat referred to her as a human. But still, I think we'll know the answer eventually from inside the show, so anything until then is useless speculation (which is all in good fun, especially on The Howling, of course). --99.50.120.236 05:35, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Why can't River Song be Jenny? That would establish a strong link between her and the Doctor, assuming that she was a future companion. Drakefantastic 21:14, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

Because it's a stupid, ridiculous, and very repetive theroy, no different than the Rani crap we get every year. And Doctor Who isn't about incest, either. River Song has a hinted sexual interest in the Doctor., and is implied to be his wife both off-screen and on-screen. Jenny is just a bialogical grown daughter from the 61st century, River is woman from the Doctor's future from the 51st century. End of. Delton Menace 01:10, May 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that's going a little _too_ far. It's not impossible--I'm sure if Moffat decided to do that tomorrow, he could find a way to write it into the story (given what we've seen so far; episodes 12 and 13 might change that...). But it is still very unlikely, because I don't think Moffat would _want_ to write it into the story.


 * As for "Doctor Who isn't about incest"--well, yeah, but Doctor Who wasn't about romance, either--no hanky-panky in the TARDIS and all that--but RTD was able to change that and make it work. So, again, it's not impossible that Moffat could find a way to turn it into a classical Greek tragedy (or a soap opera or something) and make it work, it's just unlikely that he'd want to do so. If he wants to turn Doctor Who into Peter Pan, Oedipus or Elektra takes him pretty far away from his theme.... --Falcotron 05:39, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sure I won't be popular for suggesting this; however, I'm going to anyway... ROMANA, ANYONE?!
 * The time lords all died in TLGTW/The End of Time, Correct? No! Romana disappeared into E-Space during 4th doctor's tenure...
 * Discuss.RUMyMommy 17:49, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, links in with Pandora/ Pondorica, see:


 * Pandora

--RUMyMommy 18:16, May 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, Romana was brought back from E-Space in the spinoff media and became President of Gallifrey. As RTD himself pointed out, even if you ignore the licensed novels and audios, the BBC webcast version of Shada had Lady President Romana with the Eighth Doctor. As far as he's concerned, Romana was the President who was replaced by Rassilon.


 * However, none of that actually happened on screen in the show, so if Moff wants to go with a strict TV-or-nothing continuity, he could bring Romana back. (He could even have Paul Cornell remake his novel Goth Opera with 11 instead of 5, just like he did with Human Nature.)


 * Pandora, on the other hand, doesn't even exist other than in the spinoff continuity; if you bring her back, you pretty much have to accept that Romana came back and was President during the LGTW, which means she's dead.


 * Also, even if Moff wanted to bring Romana back, why turn River into her? River and Romana are radically different characters, and both great characters, so why throw away one for no reason when you can have them both? In fact, they'd be even better interacting together, especially if Moffat is the writer (assuming here that Romana is at least a maybe-ex-girlfriend). --Falcotron 02:25, May 7, 2010 (UTC)