User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-197.86.143.194-20200710194940

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-197.86.143.194-20200710194940 This one reared its head, when someone rather dismissively said that the reason a certain piece of narrative couldn't work is because it would "imply that the Monk is the Master as well, which he very clearly isn’t."

There are several things wrong with this single point. This will be a long post, and it may lead to I don't know what.

Let's begin with what we all agree on. In the Hartnell era, Peter Butterworth appeared in two television serials, as a character who, like the Doctor, had a TARDIS. And that's pretty much all that's universally accepted by various strands. Who was this character? What was he called? Did he know the Doctor prior to his first television appearance? And did he ever return, in any medium? There are multiple contradictory pieces of narrative, often within a single framework. And when we take real-world statements into account, it gets even more tangled.

The first key issue here is simple. The character never actually identified himself as "the Monk". Go back and watch the episodes. Nobody calls him by his actual name, and as he's disguised as a monk, then "the monk"(and NOT "the Monk") becomes the most convenient term to apply to him. However, it is very clearly stated this this is a disguise, and we get


 * DOCTOR: Yes, and you can drop the monk's act.

The term "Time Lord" was first used in The War Games, and it was made clear that the Doctor and the War Chief instantly recognise each other, have a history together, and are both Time Lords.

At another discussion, there are multiple narrative points establishing that the War Chief and the Master are one and the same. But, as someone stated, does this mean that "the Monk"[sic] is the same character? Yes, and No, and Yes, and No...

First, as noted on that discussion, the same small group of people wrote The War Games and the Pertwee Era, a well as novelised all those stories, and they unambiguously made it crystal clear that Brayshaw=Delgado. If the idea was that canon was "the stuff from the past 2 or 3 years" that definitely made Delgado and Brayshaw the same Time Lord, but did it include Butterworth?

The statements about the Doctor having only faced ONE Time Lord before Omega, only TWO TARDISes ever having been stolen etc. clearly led many people to say, that Yes, Peter Buttewroth was playing the same character.

The Doctor Who Game of Time & Space board game, and the FASA Role Playing Game both stated outright that the Master disguised himself as a monk in 1066 AD. While the Master File(FASA again) listed Peter Butterworth as the first actor to play the Master. Meanwhile, the preview for The King's Demons in Doctor Who Magazine said that the villain would be the same villain from The Time Meddler. It was, of course, the Master. DWM even had an article later, where the theory was that Time Lords meet out of sequence, The idea being put forth was not that the "Monk" was the Master, that was taken as read, it was that Butterworth may be a post-Delgado Master.

Then, of course there's the fact that Pertwee refers to Delgado as a "jackanapes", Simm calls himself "Harold Saxon", Yana is uncovered thanks to his anachronistic watch, and Simm having a laser screwdriver(like Butteworth had in a missing episode of TDMP). To name just a few examples of many. SO, case closed?

Well, of course not. The same DWM also ran a comic called 4-Dimensional Vistas. Here the character returned, but called 'the Time Meddler'. He was a "failed Time Lord". He didn't wear a monk's cowl(obviously), and the "m" word was never used. Yet, it's clear he's not the Master. It is made abundantly clear that the character's Time Lord name is "the Time Meddler", not anything else.

But then DWM ran another comic, where the character reappeared, and here he is called "the Meddling Monk".

To throw a spanner in the works, Virgin Books gave us the novel No Future. Here the character reappeared, and met up with the Seventh Doctor. He was said to be called "Mortimus"( name never used before), and it was stated that he had not encountered the Doctor since TDMP.(Which throws the DWM comics out of the Virgin continuity. And, of course those two comics contradict each other.) Worse, he was said to have been "trapped on an ice planet", which must have occurred in some unknown adventure. He made it clear he had never encountered the Doctor before The Time Meddler. (This whole book seemed like the author trying to force continuity more than trying to write a story).

The same author also wrote The Discontinuity Guide, which told us that "the Monk and the Doctor had never met before The Time Meddler". Even though there is NOTHING in that story that says that. So, that is a blatant lie. Funnily enough, the same book also tells us that the First Doctor completely fails to recognise the Master in The Five Doctors, without a hint of irony or shame.

Was The Discontinuity Guide entirely wrong? Not in that sense. Again, the actual television serial The Time Meddler doesn't actually show the encounter. The novelisation says they instantly recognise each other, but that was after FASA etc, While The Discontinuity Guide was after No Future.

We then reach Divided Loyalties. Here, Mortimus is at the Academy with the Doctor, and the two are good friends. This completely and utterly contradicts No Future. Were they buddies at the Academy, or did they first meet in 1066? It can't be both.

The Revived Series seemed to throw doubt on the canonicity of much of the spin-off material, and with RTD giving us Harold Saxon, many felt that this was saying "He could be the Master, but we're not saying it outright".

But then, RTD left, and Nicholas Briggs took over Big Finish. Briggs clearly feels that "the Monk" is a separate character. Or characters.

In The Books of Kells, the Doctor encounters "the Monk" in and 11th century monastery. Everyone, the Doctor, Lucie, Tamsin, Susan, the Daleks all call him "the Monk" as though that is his Time Lord name. More importantly, he refers to HIMSELF as "the Monk". And, very importantly, the Doctor and "the Monk" agree that they haven't seen each other since The Daleks; Master Plan. And, again very importantly, the Doctor states that he FIRST NET "the Monk" in 1066.

In the TIME MEDDLER'S first three encounters, he first went to an 11th century monastery, then had a close encounter trying to ally himself with the Daleks, in which two of the Doctor's companions and a debatable companion were all killed. Finally, he teamed up with the Ice Warriors, which saw the Doctor be imprisoned.

So, in "the Monk's" first three Big Finish Audios, he first went to an 11th century monastery, then he teamed up with the ice Warriors, which saw the Doctor be imprisoned. Finally, he had a close encounter trying to ally himself with the Daleks, in which two of the Doctor's companions and a debatable companion were all killed. And again, everyone calls him "the Monk".

However, things take two weird turns, when The Rani Elite has the Doctor and the Rani reminiscing about their time at the Academy, including their old friend Mortimus. But, if Series 4 of the Eighth Doctor audios established that the Doctor and the Monk never knew each other from Gallifrey, then Graeme Garden's Monk and this friend from the Academy called Mortimus must be two separate people.

And then in The Secret History, the Fifth Doctor meets the Mom. (For Garden this is after meeting the Eighth Doctor). Here, when the Doctor calls him "Monk", Garden's character says that the Doctor is THE ONLY ONE who calls him "the Monk". This despite EVERYONE(including himself) referring to him as that in the NEDA.

Rufus Hound appears in the Second Doctor audio The Black Hole. Here he is disguised as a Commander. He says that he has worn many disguises, but when he FIRST MET the Doctor he was disguised as a monk. And the, with no logical reason, he starts dressing as a monk again. On a space station. Even odder, another Time Lord called Pavo calls him "Monk" as as his Time Lord name, with no reason given.

The Hound "Meddling Monk" also meets up with the Third and Fourth Doctors, making several-released-earlier-but-set-later "we haven't seen each other since The Daleks Master Plan" references increasingly discontinuous.

And then Hound, who has now adopted the name "the Meddling Monk" meets up with the EIGHTH Doctor. And it is then established that he is a post-Garden "Monk". But, if Garden was already "the Monk", and Hound was the one who took on the moniker "the Monk".... If the Doctor was good friends with Mortimus at the Academy, but Garden, Mcgann and Hound all make it explicitly clear that the Doctor and the "Monk" never knew each other on Gallifrey, then again Mortimus has to be a different person to "the Monk", according to Big Finish. Hound also makes ti clear that he survived the Time War. Which makes Eccleston and Tennant's failure to detect him another continuity error.

It is the Twelfth Doctor who then RE-discovers that "Mortimus" survived the Time War. And here, it's stated that the Doctor is the only one who calls him "the (Meddling) Monk". Despite both garden and Hound(as well as pretty much everyone else in Big Finish) calling him that.

Made even more surreal by the fact that HE WAS NEVER A MONK.

So, we can say Virgin had their one take. FASA had their take. DWM seemed to have at least different takes. Divided Loyalties would seem to to have another take.Big Finish have tied themselves into knots of continuity. While the television series never explicitly stated anything any way. And, going by Target, this character would very strongly appear to be the Master.

How can he both be and not be the Master?

How can he have been friends with the Doctor as part of the Deca, and meet him for the first time ever in 1066?

How can he both have been stranded on an ice planet, while very clearly NOT having been stranded on an ice planet?

How can the Doctor be the only one who calls him "Monk", when he himself keeps saying that he's "the Monk" in Big Finish audios?

Was Graeme Garden or Rufus Hound the one who adopted the name "the Monk"?

How can the Doctor keep encountering him "for the first time since The Daleks Master Plan" in at least half a dozen different stories?

And yet, with all this, one simple thing has been taken fro granted. It seems obvious to us all NOW. And yet there is NOTHING AT ALL in either The Time Meddler nor The Daleks' Master Plan to lead anyone to that conclusion.

Where in The Time Meddler or The Daleks' Master Plan is it stated that Peter Butterworth's character is a Time Lord?

Yes, the Doctor says that they "come from the same place". But a) this could be a guess as the other character has a TARDIS, b)all of Butterworth's meddling involves Earth history, and all his stolen artifacts are from Earth, and c)at this stage the Doctor still had one heart, and referred to himself as a 'human being'.

It seems strange now. But, ignore everything you think you 'know' about early Doctor Who. If you just watch from An Unearthly Child, then through Season 3, there is noting at all to make you think that Peter Butterworth's character is anything other than a HUMAN BEING FROM THE FUTURE.

The first time "Time Lords" are mentioned is The War Games. The first character identified as a "Time Lord" is the War Chief. The Doctor is the second, and from then on, the Doctor is a two-hearted Time Lord. As is the War Chief. And, obviously, the Master.

In multiple Target books, interviews etc. it is stated that only two Time Lords ever stole TARDISes. It is stated that only two Time Lords ever left Gallifrey. And the history of the Doctor and the Master includes multiple references that are unambiguously to The War Games. So, clearly, the Master and the War Chief are the same Time Lord.

Does that make Peter Butterworth's character the same Time Lord? Well, the moment you identify him as a Time Lord, then, per those multiple references to TWO renegade Time Lords, he MUST be. And all those stories, 4-Dimensional Vistas, No Future, all those Big Finish audios all identify the different takes on the character, whether he's called Mortimus, the Monk, the Time Meddler, or the Meddling Monk as a Time Lord. But, to call him a Time Lord is to call him the Master. You can't have him be a Time Lord who met the Doctor before the Doctor encountered Omega, and NOT Have him be the Master. And the War Chief.

But is there another possibility? One that was staring everyone in the face for years? And, perversely enough, one from the SAME PEOPLE who have us Graeme Garden and Rufus Hound's grotesques? There could very well be.

Did Peter Butterworth's character return in a short story? One missed by this wiki, because they were so obsessed with "Is the Time Meddler, er Monk, er Meddling Monk, er Mortimus, er... the same Time Lord as the Master?"

That story is of course The Church of Football (short story). And there is a time-travelling character in it called John Scanlon. He is a HUMAN who stole a TARDIS. And it's clear he's from the far future. And he meddles in history. Earth history. And he collects multiple treasures and artifacts from history. Earth history. And, just reading that story, there is nobody else this human time meddler really can be.

Does that make Scanlon THE return-of-Butterwoth? No. But it undoubtedly makes him ONE return of Butterworth.

And there is narrative evidence that Butterworht is the Master. There's narrative evidence he's not the Master. There's narrative evidence he knew the Doctor at the Academy. There's narrative evidence he never met the Doctor before 1066. etc. etc.

As it stands now, this wiki pushes ONE specific position. Which itself, is completely contradictory, and well, impossible.

To summarise, the article "the Monk" needs a MAJOR rewrite. As there are numerous contradictory positions, and for anyone to state "this one is best" is wrong.