Howling:Oswin

Well, now that we know that Jenna-Lousie Coleman's character was a Dalek the entire time, does anybody have any guess as to how she will come back as a character on Christmas? The most obvious way would be for the Doctor to meet her earlier in her timeline, before while she was still a Human, knowing that she would eventually become a Dalek the entire time he knew her. Still that doesn't quite seem to match the backstory that she gave, although she could of course ohave been lying.Icecreamdif ☎  16:26, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

She was a full Dalek, undamaged. Who's to say she doesn't just Emergency Shift off the rock before they blow it up. I'm sure the damaged Daleks had their shifts taken out, but Oswin was an off the truck, shiny new Dalek. --LiaThorngrove ☎  16:49, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think Jenna-Louise Coleman will return. My theory is that all the promotion pictures where a way to trick us and the leaked pictures from the christmas episode was leaked voluntary also just to trick us. Cause remember just like the Doctor, Steven Moffat lies ;) --88.131.100.247talk to me 17:31, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. If Moffat was just lying about her becoming a companion to mess with us, then surely he would have said that she would become a companion in Asylum of the Daleks, not the Christmas special. Sort of like how we were told that Susie would be a main character in Torchwood. I just don't think he would pick a random actress from one episode that we haven't seen yet, and have her do a bunch of interviews and stuff saying that she will become a companion in another episode that we haven't seen yet. It is possible that she temporal shifted out of the Asylum, but she would still be in Dalek form, and thus played by Nicholas Briggs, rather than in human form and played by Jenna-Louise Coleman.Icecreamdif ☎  17:52, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

There are many possibilities:


 * 1. The new companion might not be Oswin but a relative (an ancestor, perhaps).
 * 2. The new companion might be Oswin from earlier in her timeline.
 * 3. The new companion might be Oswin from an alternate or changed history.
 * 4. The new companion might not be Oswin but a completely unrelated character (as with the soothsayer in Pompeii & Amy Pond, both played by Karen Gillan).
 * 5. The new companion might be Oswin after she (somehow) escaped from the exploding asylum planet & (somehow) regained her human form.
 * 6. Moffat might be outdoing himself with his lying, this time.

There must be others but 6 seems enough for now. --92.16.2.84talk to me 18:59, September 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * I doubt that it's just 2 completely unrelated characters played by the same actress. Karen Gillan played the soothsayer, and Colin Baker played Maxil before they were cast in their more famous roles, but Jenna Louise-Coleman has already been announced as the new companion.Icecreamdif ☎  19:03, September 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Icecreamdif: Feel free to doubt. I didn't say these were likelihoods, only possibilities. However, Peter Purves played a tourist in the very same story (The Chase) in which he joined the regular cast as companion. It's still possible Oswin has no connection with the companion-to-be, even though it's pretty unlikely.


 * LiaThorngrove: "Who's to say she doesn't just Emergency Shift off the rock before they blow it up[?]" The only Daleks we've ever seen using Emergency Temporal Shift were the 4 members of the Cult of Skaro. They were very, very special Daleks. Considering that the Daleks had needed & been using the Asylum for a very long time &, at various times, have also suffered a few rebellions, Emergency Temporal Shift is not the kind of ability the Dalek authorities would want to be generally available. The very fact that we've not seen any other Dalek use Emergency Temporal Shift, no matter how useful it would have been, strongly suggests (although it doesn't prove) they don't have it & that it was unique to the Cult of Skaro. The use of teleport facilities, shown in the episode, also suggests (without proving) the same thing. Why have teleports, if they could Emergency Shift?


 * A more likely escape method for Oswin would be to teleport at the same time as the Doctor. She'd have to move fast but any escape method requires that; she didn't have much time. The teleport would be detected & she'd expect that. That's why it would have to be at the the same time as the Doctor teleported & would also need to be from the same origin (no problem as she was already there) to the same destination. That destination was a large Dalek ship -- a good hiding place for a Dalek, especially one who could "persuade" the computer systems she was authorised to be there. Having the same time & end-points as the Doctor's teleport would mean that her teleport would be indistingushable from & thus "covered by" his. --2.99.198.97talk to me 20:47, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Well, she is definitely sitting in the identical chair as Jenny's ship. I'm not saying she's Jenny, if for no other reason than she starts out by wishing her mother a happy birthday in her personal log. However, couple that with a few additional observations a) the same actress as an upcoming companion who is supposed to be a Victorian, not a future human, and the first thing Oswin does is reference her mother; b) the Doctor never actually sees her; c) the Doctor's instant response to the music from Carmen is "it's me" (making the joke about the triangle), but we also know it is her way of blocking out the noise of the 'Daleks' trying to penetrate her defenses; d) her manner of speech, though not out of synch with other Moffat characters, is a particularly familiar style of hyper-brilliance-followed-by-non-sequitors typical of only one character; and e) perhaps her genius isn't the only reasons she required full conversion (taken with Amy's remark about the Doctor's wristband, it makes me think we may not have been shown the real reason Oswin was desperately pleading 'I'm human' to her captors in the flashback.). All together, there are certainly lots of hints at a familial link with the Doctor. However, it could be as simple as #1 above, just with lots of gratuitous Moffat innuendos (you know how he loves to make paternity jokes about the Doctor). The reveal will probably be a link to her name somehow. My guess is the doctor might use 'Oswald' as a pseudonym at some point, perhaps even at the Christmas Special, and inadvertently create another naming-paradox (Moffat loves those, too). Remember, he never saw her, so he won't immediately realize a connection with his new companion, and may innocently create loops. Wibbly-Wobbly ☎  00:55, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

The chair: That might simply be the props department being on the ball. Spaceship chair from about the same era? Use the same type of chair, they'd probably be standardised. --89.241.78.208talk to me 03:14, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I wouldn't put it past them to have just planted the chair as a punishment for all of the 'Return of Jenny' threads over the years. Still, deploying Jenn-a in a surprise double appearance in her own debut season means they have to be up to something, and they seem to be trying to attach several 'daughter' memes to her. Wibbly-Wobbly ☎  06:12, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Wibbly-Wobbly, I'm sorry. I can't resist it. I've tried but I just can't: I think you're putting far more weight on that chair than it can support. --89.240.245.227talk to me 13:10, September 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * I would imagine that the props department just needed a chair that looked good for a spaceship, realized they had one lying around, and figured it would be cheaper and easier to reuse it than to make a new one.138.78.49.162talk to me 19:21, September 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was 138. I didn't realize I wasn't logged in.Icecreamdif ☎  19:25, September 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * If they have any sense, the props department will have a record somewhere of what props have been used as what & just look it up when they need (say) a spaceship chair. --89.242.71.183talk to me 21:35, September 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * What part of 'notice everything' don't you understand? ;) (Or, 'I saw it, but I missed it...') What would satisfy me is if any other episode featured the chair as a generic prop: Say, "Impossible Planet" or Captain Jack's Chula ship.  Then, it would be just a prop.  Otherwise it's an intentional clue or an intentional red herring.  This man did write Sherlock, you know.  You have seen Study in Pink, right?  Wibbly-Wobbly  ☎  03:49, September 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * "Notice everything" I do understand. What part of "Don't jump to conclusions" don't you understand? I'm not saying it isn't or couldn't be come kind of clue. The way Moffat works, however, means that even if it is a clue it doesn't necessarily mean what you're desperate to believe it means. Moffat understands clues & is fully capable of planting them to point in misleading directions. Spotting clues is one thing; interpreting them correctly is another.


 * You seem to have missed one definite clue that Oswin is not Jenny: The nanogenes couldn't cope with the Doctor because he's a Time Lord, not a human. Jenny is genetically derived solely from the Doctor & is biologically a Time Lord. They'd not be able to affect her, either. And, yes, I know that also could be misdirection.


 * There are potential clues pointing all over the place. Some of those in Series 5, for example, couldn't have been seen as clues at all, until we knew of events later in the series. I expect Series 7 will be the same in that respect. --2.96.17.34talk to me 10:39, September 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I doubt that Moffat is really involved in creating the sets. I'm sure that if he really wanted Jenny's chair in their he could have told them, but chances are he wasn't even involved in the decision to put it there.Icecreamdif ☎  18:36, September 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Moffat is probably only involved to the extent he wants to be. Unfortunately, we don't know in any particular instance how involved that was. I still think Wibbly-Wobbly is barking up a very wrong tree but I recognise I could be mistaken.


 * Maybe more to the point, Cult Box has a few theories of its own that bear examination. The one that struck me most -- because I've not seen it elsewhere -- is that the Dalek never was Oswin, it only thought it was. --89.242.79.32talk to me 23:20, September 5, 2012 (UTC)

her memory copied and transferred into the brain of a dalek? could work. maybe from an experiment to see if daleks could be made to feel something other than hate. that dalek does seem to be a bit too human to have been a conversion. there was too much of oswin left. if it was a conversion, they would have probably wiped her memory or done something else to suppress non-hate related emotions. unless that's why she was down on the asylum. the conversion didn't work so she was put down in the maximum security part of the mental ward in the assylum so sh couldn't contaminate the rest in any way. so much for maximum security, but the daleks wouldn't have been able to imagine that an overly human dalek who was a genius as well would have the imagination, boredom and will to hack into the systems of the asylum. Imamadmad ☎  00:02, September 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * Her memory being copied and transferred into the brain of a Dalek is possible. I don't think that it is likely but it is possible. Human to Dalek conversions are so rare, that we don't really know what the Daleks could have done to a particularly clever human like Oswin. The Daleks are not the Cybermen, and generally do not reproduce in this fashion. The most major example of human to Dalek conversion that we've seen was in Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways, and in that instance the emporer claimed that only one cell in each human was fit to become a Dalek. Given that they seemed to have used a good many of the cells in Oswin's body for the conversion, it is perhaps not surprising that she retained her individuality. There are still some parts of her story that are unclear. She claims that she was on the Alaska and when that ship crashed into the Dalek Asylum she was transferred into a Dalek because the Daleks need genius. The rope ladder in the escape pod would seem to support that story, but one has to wonder why the insane Daleks in the Asylum would possibly need genius or more Daleks. It is possible that her memories are wrong or she was lying, and she was actually converted elsewhere and when the conversion failed the Daleks dumped her in the Asylum. Hopefully, we'll get some answers as the season progresses.Icecreamdif ☎  00:42, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

Just for the record, per the 9/5/12 10:39 comment, I wasn't even aiming at Oswin being Jenny (I started out with 'I'm not trying to say Oswin is Jenny'). I'm suggesting they are planting several memes on-set meant to hint at an eyebrow-raising origin story for a now-dead Oswin who is a future-born ringer for an upcoming past-born companion (rumor has it on that last). I've been wrong before. Usually, in fact. Wibbly-Wobbly ☎  01:04, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

Wibbly-Wobbly: "I've been wrong before. Usually, in fact." When trying to work out what Moffat's up to, you're very far from being alone in that! I'm not sure I'd want to be good at working that out -- it'd mean I could think like him & that would be extremely worrying.

As I said before, one of the main problems with Moffat & clues is that he's too good at planting the things so that they (seem to) point in entirely the wrong direction & keep doing so up to the moment he finally reveals what's going on. If you can find them in the Archives, look at some of the theories generated by "The only water in the forest is the river". --89.242.79.32talk to me 01:55, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

As a theory completely irrelevant to most of these: Oswin had created schematics for a device and at the last moment sent them out to a random location, which just happened to be on the screen of an evil guy. He then for some reason used the device to erase peoples memories of Christmas or something along those lines. The Doctor stops him but not before he activates the self destruct. He is unable to stop it, but he has the memory device. He uses it to create a new Oswin, who with her hacking superpowers stops the self destruct with more than 1 second to spare. She had created the device subconsciously, as part of her knew she was a Dalek, but when all of her found out she realised she could merely send out the plans and allow the Doctor to escape, but she made sure that he would remember her. The new Oswin becomes the Doctor's companion. [Unsigned but appears to be Opalsaloony, 04:13, September 9, 2012 (UTC)]

First, please sign your contributions.

Second, that's not a theory, it's a story proposal. Don't call us... (& don't call Moffat, either). --2.96.18.113talk to me 07:24, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

First, fair enough, second, true but it seemed that she said "remember me" a bit too much. That lead me to the suspicion of a memory weave-like device.--Opal= Loony 20:37, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

So just to throw out a bone that you guys havent thought of yet it's just that moffet said we wouldn't know about the new companion till christmas and the doctor annoucing that "it's christmas " when they were first brought toward the dalek parliment. Cory Jaynes ☎  02:41, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

It's been made quite clear that he means that Jenna-Louise Coleman's character is becoming a companion during the Christmas special. There have even been pictures of her on set in the Christmas special.Icecreamdif ☎  16:09, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Cory Jaynes: It's not that we didn't think of it. It's just that it's far too likely that the line was intended to be a reference (not a very subtle one) to the forthcoming Christmas special -- a touch of advertising, if you like. --2.96.19.52talk to me 23:13, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think the "Its Christmas " comment was just a reference to the fact the Daleks had captured the Doctor and it was like Christmas as they get to play with their new toy. Rasputin_Oz

Opal, Oswin saying "remember me" a bit too much: It's certainly not impossible that the "Remember me" thing is significant. It has been before, especially in Series 5. The trouble is that, even if it is significant, we don't yet know what it signifies. That, of course, was the situation with "The only water in the forest is the river," in Series 6. We knew that was significant & it generated all kinds of theories. Some were plain ludicrous, others were plausible & all of them (the ones I saw, anyway) were wrong. --78.146.185.135talk to me 21:16, September 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oswin most likely just meant "I'm sacrificing myself for you, so please don't forget me."Icecreamdif ☎  02:10, September 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * That's by far the most obvious & likely meaning. I said it wasn't impossible that there might turn out to be something more to it than that. I didn't say & didn't intend to be taken as meaning that I thought it was probable. I think it's a long shot, at best. --89.242.72.221talk to me 05:09, September 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh.


 * Forget the Doctor, but remember me.


 * Oh, you are good.


 * Wibbly-Wobbly ☎  05:14, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

I think the Oswin in episode 1 will turn out to be a Ganger or a robot based on the real Oswin. 94.72.192.2talk to me 15:32, September 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * The Daleks might be able to convert a Ganger into a Dalek, but I doubt that they could convert a robot. Maybe the Oswin who is introduced in the Christmas special and becomes the new companion will turn out to be a ganger/robot of the real Oswin.Icecreamdif ☎  15:59, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

The human Oswin we saw in episode 1 has already (in episode 1) turned out to be only a mental self-image. --89.241.68.21talk to me 16:02, September 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, but assuming that the backstory they gave for her in the episode was true, she was originally a Human who looked like Jenna-Louise Coleman, before the Daleks converted her. Presumably, throughout the episode, she looked like any other Dalek squid thing.Icecreamdif ☎  16:06, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Did the Daleks turn her into a Mutant though? I ask this with two points in mind: 1. The Daleks at the asylum probably didn't have access to a Mutant Lab. 2. I thought we saw her sitting inside the casing at one point and she was just covered in wires, she wasn't a squid. So maybe the robot idea still stands, if it's a sophisticated one. 94.72.192.2talk to me 16:22, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

Icecreamdif, "... she was originally a Human who looked like Jenna-Louise Coleman...": The comment was about "the Oswin in episode 1", meaning (I assume) the Oswin we saw on screen in that episode. That Oswin was only a mental self-image. Of course, it's close-on certain that she had that mental self-image because she did originally look like that. "A Ganger or a robot" might be needed to explain a solid copy visible to the other characters but the point is that, during the entire episode, there never was a seemingly-human Oswin to require explanation. "Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity." (William of Occam) --89.241.68.21talk to me 18:54, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

As I said before, I'm sure there was a moment when we saw her in her casing and covered in wires. 77.86.108.250talk to me 20:15, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

In that case, the first thing to do is to check that you really did see it & to let the rest of us know roughly when in the episode it occurs. There wouldn't be much point in anyone looking for an in-universe explanation of it, if you were mistaken. For example, if what was shown was a fade that happened to superimpose an image of wires on the image of Oswin. I don't recall seeing what you describe but, of course, I might have missed it (happens sometimes). If it was shown, you ought also to check that it wasn't a flashback representing Oswin remembering the conversion process. --89.240.250.102talk to me 01:17, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it was a falshback of Oswin remembering the conversion. Not that it makes much difference, because there's no reason to believe that Oswin never looked like that. It would be a pretty bad plot twist if that turns out to be the case. It's arguable that you're the one who is multiplying entities here, because we know it would be a bad plot twist if it turns out Oswin was imagining herself as somone else. 94.72.194.203talk to me 19:31, September 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think we should really just assume that Oswin looked like Jenna-Louise Coleman before she became a Dalek, but looked like a squid thing once she was converted.Icecreamdif ☎  20:10, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe she wasn't even converted into a squid and she just had her mind Daleked. 94.72.194.203talk to me 21:04, September 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * But her mind wasn't "Daleked". That was the entire problem. She was turned into a Dalek, but she still had her human mind. Besides, if they had just "Daleked" her mind, than they would have probably just turned her into one of those puppets, rather than putting her into a Dalek case. Given that she was in a case, I think we can safely assume that she was made a squid.Icecreamdif ☎  01:43, September 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * 94, "It's arguable that you're the one who is multiplying entities here, because we know it would be a bad plot twist if it turns out Oswin was imagining herself as somone else": That doesn't appear to make sense. Note: other users (not mentioning names) have occasionally mistyped things so that intended sense came out as nonsense. Has that happened here? --89.242.78.6talk to me 02:58, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

Icecreamdif: I don't see how they could have turned her into a mutant. Doesn't mean she wasn't, of course, but I don't really no how the Daleks turn people into mutants anyway, let alone how they would do it on an asylum closed off from everything else.

89: I don't know if you're the same 89, but I was adressing 89.241, who so far as I could tell was arguing that we had no proof that Oswin looked like Jenna - Louise Coleman. If this was the case, it would be a disappointing way of explaining that this was how she managed to appear in the Christmas Special, if she does appear in it. Having re -read 89.241's comment, I can't even work out if this was what he/she was trying to get at. That's just what I got the first time I read it. 94.72.194.203talk to me 09:33, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

I am the same 89 but that is most emphatically not what I was arguing. I said, "it's close-on certain that she had that mental self-image because she did originally look like that." You seem to have read the exact opposite of what was written.

In case it was my language that misled you: "close-on certain" means "very nearly certain". If it hadn't been Moffat in charge, I'd just have said "certain" but, with him, nothing is ever completely certain.

I also said that, because it was a mental image & none of the other characters ever saw it, we don't need to invent gangers or robots to explain it. The gangers or robots were the entities for which there was no necessity. --89.241.72.223talk to me 11:52, September 22, 2012 (UTC)