Howling:Doctor Who

We've all been assuming that "Doctor Who?", the oldest question hidden in plain sight, referred to the Doctor's true name, but Asylum of the Daleks seems to have offered another interpretation. It may be possible that it actually refers to the Daleks or some other enemy who should know him having absolutely no idea who he is. Any thoughts?Icecreamdif ☎  16:28, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

One thought: With Moffat in charge, it could be almost anything -- from the obvious (because we'll be sure it can't be) to something totally different from all the possibilities he's dropped hints about in the meantime. --92.16.2.84talk to me 19:04, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

I know Moffat will have done it for a good reason, so I'll always bear this in-mind in future. Gallifrey102 ☎  18:29, September 5, 2012 (UTC)

All I know is that I'm gonna laugh if the answer is just "The Doctor" or if his name is "Who" or "Victorious" or hey maybe "Valeyard" or "Tardis" I mean the tardis does hide in plain sight. Cory Jaynes ☎  21:08, September 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Who would be funny for Bout a minute, and then it would just seem stupid. Valeyard wouldn't make any sense, because then there is no good reason that it took the Doctor the duration of his trial to figure out who the Valeyard was. Tardis would be a terrible name. That would be like a human being named "Car" or "airplane."Icecreamdif ☎  02:14, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Well I've never seen anything before the ninith doctor so I wouldn't know I just know of the valeyard and that he should be reappearing soon if he hasn't already, but either way to get back on subject, it could be like with "A Town called Mercy" and him being mistaken for another doctor Cory Jaynes ☎  03:47, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

It's unlikely to be like with "A Town called Mercy" -- for the simple reason that, if such a mistake were going to be the eventual resolution, it wouldn't have been used in that episode. That bullet has already been fired. --89.242.75.176talk to me 05:14, September 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't understand people trying to guess his name. Icecreamdif already explained what's wrong with all of the examples given. But really, there is no name that could possibly make an interesting story. His real name is Calfaxivaniamunditrolan, an important figure from Gallifreyan history that we've never heard before? So what? Or Fred? Jesus of Nazareth? Zaphod Beeblebrox? Koschei (and he and the Master are actually the same person, just like in Fight Club)? Forget specifics; what kind of interesting revelation could there possibly be in any name they could give him?


 * However Moffat resolves the "Doctor Who?" storyline (and I won't pretend to have any idea how he's going to do that, except that it'll probably be better than anything I could come up with), it's not going to be by giving us the name. --70.36.140.233talk to me 09:47, September 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, if he made it Jesus, or Koschei, or Zagreus or something than it would be an interesting story. It would be a terrible story, but it would be interesting.Icecreamdif ☎  16:05, September 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * LOL, good point. I'd almost like to see someone write that as fan fiction to see how bad it could be… --70.36.140.233talk to me 21:38, September 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * "… to see how bad it could be…" Maybe not worse than you can imagine but certainly worse than you'd ever want to imagine!


 * More to the point, 70's almost certainly right. It's possible that a few other characters might find out what the Doctor's name is but that can easily be done without letting the audience (us) know what it is. --78.146.189.73talk to me 09:10, September 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * Odds are, he'll whisper it to River.Icecreamdif ☎  15:24, September 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * Even if I were a gambler (which I'm not), there's absolutely no way I'd bet against that one. --89.242.70.202talk to me 17:04, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

He already did whisper it to River. His name is look into my eye. 94.72.194.203talk to me 19:06, September 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * You're right. Why are we all making such a big deal of his name on these forums when it has already been revealed.Icecreamdif ☎  00:51, September 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * that wasn't his name. he just said it was so amy/rory didn't get suspicious when the doctor was really whispering to river to look into his eyes and realise he was just the teselector so she wouldn't feel bad about "killing" him so the timeline could go back to normal.  Imamadmad  ☎  05:01, September 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Imamadmad, I think you're using a theme that disables display of sarcasm mode.


 * Anyway, the Doctor has told people in the past. His parents certainly knew his name. At least Borusa, the Master, and Susan probably knew it, and probably various other Time Lords; there were hints about Romana, Peri, and Ace; and the novels tell us for certain that a few other companions knew it too. Maybe his name wasn't as big a deal before the Last Great Time War for some reason, but why would that be true? And, if it was, why did Peinforte make such a big deal out of it in Silver Nemesis? (Of course behind the scenes, what she was hinting at was that it was that the Doctor was the Other, and it was the Other's name that was a big secret, but I very highly doubt that's what Moffat is building up to.)


 * So, the big question isn't what is the Doctor's name, it's why it would be such a big deal for him to tell it to River (or anyone else, but it'll probably be her). I have no idea what the reason will be, but I'm pretty sure it won't have anything to do with what the name actually is. --70.36.140.233talk to me 06:22, September 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Exactly. The only way for the name itsself to have any meaning would be if it was something along the lines of Rassilon or Melody Pond or something, and that would end up being the stupidest plot twist in the history of the show. The real mystery is why he has to keep his name a secret, and I'm sure that Moffat can come up with an intriguing answer for that. It should be good though, as long as it doesn't turn out that his name is Dr. Who.Icecreamdif ☎  16:56, September 25, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe his name is like the key to the time lock on Galifrey? As with everyone who knew it maybe they were erased from time like with the cracks or on galifrey and it has to be from the outside? Cory Jaynes ☎  02:03, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I realize this is before the Doctor met super-hacker Mickey Smith, but still, I'd hope he was already savvy enough to know not to use his own first name as his password. :) --70.36.140.233talk to me 02:56, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, plenty of people on Gallifrey must know his name, so that wouldn't really work. Maybe the TARDIS will assume that anyone who know's the Doctor's true name must be trustworthy, and will give that person enough access to blow her up, causing silence to fall. Then, the Silence's attempts to kill the Doctor in season 6 would actually have been an attempt to prevent the events of season 5, as they wouldn't know that the Doctor succeeded in rebooting the universe. It is the kind of convoluted plot that Moffat would come up with, and he still has to tie the TARDIS explosion into this somehow.Icecreamdif ☎  14:51, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, Cory Jaynes included "it has to be from the outside", which takes care of the problem of all the people on Gallifrey who know the Doctor's name. But it doesn't take care of the Master—if he could have just opened the time lock with the Doctor's name, half of The End of Time was unnecessary.


 * As for your idea, the Doctor's name wouldn't be a reasonable lock there either, because the biggest threat came from Time Lords who knew his name (not just the Master—Borusa, the Rani, etc.). Remember, that was half the plot of the TV movie. Of course the half-human lock mechanism isn't sufficient anymore, because the biggest potential threat is River, and River knowing the Doctor's name is the best way to gauge whether the Doctor trusts her (yet). But that idea seems to require viewers to have deep knowledge of the TV movie (or Moffat to not only bring the 8th Doctor back for the anniversary, but re-explore that plotline), so I don't see it happening. --70.36.140.233talk to me 17:32, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of somebody just using the Doctor's name to gain "Sexy's" trust, but I suppose that the Master could have used that in the TV Movie, or plenty of other episodes then.Icecreamdif ☎  21:10, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, the Master might be able to gain her trust, but he still couldn't open the link and blow up the universe, because he's not half-human.


 * Also, your idea would have fit in great in the EDAs. When Gallifrey was destroyed, Compassion rebooted the Doctor's TARDIS, and she also planted some kind of trigger somewhere that would make the Doctor try to find her once he recovered enough of his memories. Meanwhile, there should have been nobody left in the universe who knew the Doctor's name, but it turned out there were two people (the Master and Marnal), and both of them were able to partially wrest control of the TARDIS from the Doctor. --70.36.140.233talk to me 02:46, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

What I think (or maybe hope) it is, is not Doctor Who as in his name but Doctor Who as in who he really is.

This then of course links in to the stories from the original doctor who series, with where they were taking it in regards to him being a very special timelord, as in "The OTher" and also the link to the master. Cant recall the episode but in the original series, i think the last time he met the master, the master s last words as he was devoured in a fire were" You would do this to your...." I am hoping to find out the Doctor and the Master are actualyl brothers.

But as a few have said, whatever we think is going on, Moffatt and the other writers will be one step ahead of us and surprise us.

But a link to the original series will be so cool. Rasputin Oz ☎  01:51, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

When the Doctor & the Master were reminiscing about their childhood friendship on Gallifrey (in The End of Time), the Master spoke of "my father's estates". If the two of them had been full brothers, it would have been "our father's estates". That doesn't exclude the possibility of them being half-brothers but, in that case, they'd have to have the same mother & that conflicts with the TV movie.

Rasputin Oz, by the way, is mistaken in his recollection of the last meeting between the Doctor & the Master in the original series. Their last meeting was in the very last episode of the original series (Survival, episode 3) & we didn't see what happened to the Master. He & the Doctor were fighting on the planet of the Cheetah People, then the Doctor teleported back to Perivale, arriving alone. The "devoured in a fire" description sounds like Planet of Fire & there were 3 further encounters in the original series, including Survival.

"The Other" isn't mentioned at all in the TV series, only in prose works. However, the idea that the Doctor was somehow involved in the early days of Gallifreyan time travel is hinted at in Remembrance of the Daleks, as broadcast (not just in deleted scenes): When the Doctor was telling Ace about the Hand of Omega (while they were sitting on the stairs in the school), he said "...and didn't we have trouble with the prototype". Ace picked up on that "we" & the Doctor corrected it to "they". Other hints in Cartmel-era stories are even less informative & really only indicate that there is a major secret of some kind about the Doctor's identity.

I do think, however, that (as Rasputin Oz has said) it's not just the Doctor's name that's the secret but his identity. I also think it'll stay a secret. We might learn a bit more about why it's a secret but I don't think we'll find out what the secret actually is. --89.242.66.231talk to me 22:39, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

Responding to the very first entry of Sept. 2, I think “Doctor Who?” will be answered straight forward to close the time loop of the saga between the 11th Doctor and the Silence. The conflict between the Doctor and the Silence, the Silents, and Madam Kovarian is presented in a mixed order of sequence, almost a reverse order similar to the relationship of River and the Doctor. If viewed like a classic Doctor Who novel, we could follow the conflict with cause and effect misplaced across chapters. In Series 6, A Good Man Goes to War we have Madam Kovarian describing the war with the Doctor as already being long. We also have the two important facts aboout the Silents on Earth in 1969 that cannot be reconciled without two time streams: the Silents had been manipulating humans since fire and the wheel meanwhile in the same year on Earth the Silents also have a TARDIS knock-off in Day of the Moon which ends up appearing again in an earlier episode from Season 5 The Lodger (TV story). Seems reasonable that some members of the Silents arrived on Earth in 1969 from the future in their TARDIS knock-off in an attempt to change something. After River shoots all of them, one of the dying Silents tried to escape in the their time machine but ended up going only as far in time and space as the roof of Craig Owens’ flat. It would not surprise me if we find out that the Shakri in The Power of Three (TV story) where sent by the Silence in an attempt to wipe out the human race to prevent the spreading of the TV coverage of the moon landing containing the instructions to kill the Silents.

And the whole story arc holds together by stressing the current theme that time can be rewritten but not if you already know about it (or read about it in the book Melody Malone: Private Detective in Old New York Town.) On the plains of Trenzalore, once the Doctor tells the story of "who" he is and about this conflict across time to the Silence (which in the Silence’s time line will be at the beginning of the war) the Silence will be trapped into the sequence of events not knowing that the results of their attempts to fight by going into the past are already fixed. Or to put it another way, the Silence will fall. Or as Dorium translates the prediction, the Silence must fall.--ANone ☎  06:23, November 9, 2012 (UTC)