Was Joanna Mills a Witch?

I don't think Joanna came back for revenge - at least not primarily.  She wanted to reunite with Quentin and perhaps, Daphne.  I'm not sure if she was biding her time with Samantha or really not planning anything.

But, when Daphne mentioned that she and Quentin could never get married because of Samantha, one sort of sees a light go on in Joanna's head, and it's immediately afterwards that she confronts Samantha and eventually goes after her.

I agree that Lamar is the most annoying of the Trasks.  But if you mean worst in the sense of the poorest excuse for a human being, I think the honor should go to Gregory Trask-- DS' resident sexual predator and child abuser.

That's true Midnite! And what a sick individual he was!  Here we have three generations of Trasks: One, a crazy religious fanatic,  Two: a child abuser. sexual predator, coniving murdering thief, and lastly: a meddlesome, annoying busy body who doesn't know when to stop!
Wow, what a family!!!   And we thought the Collins' were bad.


Cassandra

Oh, I agree....hands down.  Gregory Trask was the single most loathsome, vile, despicable creature on DS.....ever!  Compared to him, Paul Stoddard and Jason McGuire were a pair of angels....Count Petofi was just an eccentric old duffer.....and the Leviathan Lung Thing was an unusual house pet...

and the Leviathan Lung Thing was an unusual house pet...

 

I'm sure Megan and Phillip though of it exactly that way¢â‚¬¦ Come here Lungy¢â‚¬¦ sit up¢â‚¬¦ roll over¢â‚¬¦ Good boy

Gregory Trask is without a doubt the worst of the Trask family line. He's just completely despicable - and gets everything he deserves. What I like about that character, as opposed to Lamar, or even the good ol' Rev., is that he's a well developed character, which make him the most interesting of the Trasks to watch. Lamar, on the other hand is the exceedingly boring, tedious and least developed of the three Trasks.

As far as Joanna goes, for some reason, and maybe this was in my mind only, I felt as if even Joanna had no clue she was dead for about 90% of the plot - kind of like Bruce Willis' character in the Sixth Sense. She simply thought she had come back for her lost love. It almost seems as if, at the last minute, the writers changed their minds (What a shock, DS writers changing a plot at the drop of a hat!! lol) and thought HEY wouldn't it be cool if she revealed she was a ghost after all (with a big glowing green face, I might add) before pitching Samantha off Widow's Hill?!?

Just my random thoughts before lunch 

grayson 67 (Melissa)

What powers did Joanna have that the ghosts of Sarah, Quentin, Gerard, Daphne (Joanna's sister!), Beth (and many others) didn't?
I can't think of any evidence that supports the theory that Joanna was a witch.

 That's a good point Midnite.  And when I think back now she appeared quite normal during the whole storyline.   In fact, it wasn't until the end of the story when Samantha had shot her without even as much as wounding her that made me realize that she was no longer human.

  I also feel (as others here have mentioned) that it was her strong love for Quentin, and deep hatred for Samantha that brought her back from the grave.  Along with that I also think that her sister's arrival at Collinwood probably had alot to do with her coming back too.  Maybe she didn't want to see her sister end up the same way she had.


Cassandra

I'm going to write this fast -- I'm in the middle of final exams -- so I'm hoping some allowances can be made if I make a misstatement without having an attack launched.  These are only my ideas and I never meant to present them as the last word on the subject.  I raised this question merely as that -- a question -- something I thought might be an interesting idea to someone, maybe someone who writes fanfiction who might see possibilities in my suggestion of one possible interpretation of Joanna Mill's character.  Since I posted only my thoughts, I did not attempt to adduce evidence to back them up as I might try to do were I presenting a "case" for, for example, a case for who Victoria Winters' parents really were.  But in light of rather pointed challenges to my thoughts, I'll try to think what conveyed my impressions -- though I don't know if I can provide the kind of evidence people are asking me to produce.

The ghost of Joanna Mills seemed unique to me.  I think the main thing was her corporeal presence rather than the transluscent, fleeting entities that characterizes so many ghosts on DS.  Within the context of the 1840 storyline, we might compare (or contrast) Joanna Mills to the other ghost we're presented with, that of Daniel Collins; they are obviously very different in form and in the way they appear and are presented.

Joanna reminded me of Angelique in the 1795 courtroom scene.  My thinking on Angelique may differ from that of others, because I didn't view Angelique as a ghost.  In the past, I've written at length about the resurrection appearances/bodies on DS in contrast to the ghostly entities.  In my view, Angelique resurrects on DS and never comes back as a ghost.

In my opinion, the DS writers were familiar, at least having a passing knowledge, with much classical literature including the Bible.  In the New Testament, Jesus returns from the dead -- but in his own words, he is not a ghost.  Rather, he is flesh and blood and invites the disciples to touch him as proof of this.  Interestigly, Joanna Mills echoes something very simiilar when she tells Daphne that she is real, not a ghost -- I think she even says something to the effect to touch her, feel her hands -- they're warm.  Angelique says nearly identical words when she appears to Victoria Winters when she has imprisoned the latter in the Leviathan storlyine (I think that's the the right storyline).  Both of these instances are examples of allusions to the New Testament; and of course there are other belief systems that speak of the body being physically resurrected.  In the New Testament, after his resurrection, Jesus appears and disappears at will in his new physical form, as I see Angelique also doing ... and possibly Joanna Mills.

Every other ghost on DS that I can think of is always recognized as being a ghost by others.  It's true that the very corporeal-appearing Sarah puzzles David and Victoria for que a while, but eventually even they realize that Sarah is a ghost.  Joanna Mills is different.  Not only does she fool all of the mortals, her true nature eludes even Barnabas, Angelique, and Judah -- the last two of which, especially, might be expected to recognize a ghost via their own supernatural powers and knowledge.  Since they don't, that suggests to methat Miss Mills has some special, unique properties setting her apart from many other ghosts.

Samantha is the only one who maintains that Joanna is a ghost, but that is not based on any ghostly properties or actions of Joanna but because Samantha knows she killed Joanna.  (Incidentally, I still don't think this happened at Widow's Hill, as others have mentioned again in other threads; but I admit I may have misheard the original scene and also misheard latter commentary by other characters about it. But if so, I misheard dialogue on at least two occasions indicating that this took place on the sanitarium grounds.)

So, I wondered, idly, how it is that Joanna might have some extraordinary or special aspects as a ghost.  Is she casting a spell on everyone?  Could she possibly have had powers in life that have carried over beyond the grave?  Yes, I know there is no evidence for this -- it's just a thought, and it would be interesting what the DS writers might have come up with had Joanna Mill's past and character been delved into much more.

This explanation obviously won't satisy many posters here as it doesn't rise to the level of proof, but all I can do is try to explain my impressions to which I hoped to add a dash of creative thought.

But in all your descriptions of Joanna's ghostliness, you've only demonstrated that she was a ghost unlike other ghosts previously seen on DS.

What part of that translates into "...therefore, she must have been a Witch in life."  There is no evidence that she was powerful in any way that a Witch might be.  Quite the contrary, she allows herself to be lured to a cliff and tossed off.....by a human (if evil) Samantha.  What sort of Witch would not have saved herself from such a fate?  And what reason would she have had not to intervene on behalf of Quentin, if she could?  She didn't reveal that Gerard was possessed by Judah....she did not find the head....she did not protect her sister from the Warlock.....what did she ever DO that one could point to and call Witchcraft? 

I'm going to write this fast -- I'm in the middle of final exams -- so I'm hoping some allowances can be made if I make a misstatement without having an attack launched.

I received your PM and was surprised to see this here too.  I'm sorry you're stressed by exams, but I think your statement is unfair.  Joanna presents a great opportunity for discussion-- debates about some of the issues you presented have been ongoing elsewhere and I'm pleased there's a topic about her here too-- and the admins and mod have said over and over that everyone's opinions on the topics are welcome.  I can assure you, Vlad, that I respect your opinion and honor the spirit our friendship, but I don't feel that my question or comments were disrespectful nor much different from ones that you yourself have asked or stated in the course of a debate.

All the best with finals.

I may be splitting hairs that are apparent only to me.  I did not intend to start a debate (yes, I know, this is a discussion forum ...).  I didn't make a declaration or statement -- such as "Joanna Mills was a witch"-- as one would expect in a debate.  Had I taken such an approach, I would expect a deluge of divergent opinions and counter opinions.  But I asked a question -- made a suggestion -- based on impressions, and was not anticipating challenges requiring proofs in response to what I thought was expressed as a very open question!  I expect challenges in response to statements of finality or strongly worded opinions, but usually am not armed with evidence to back up a question.  So I was a bit taken aback.  Perhaps this distinction is lost on everyone but me.  If that's the case, then I should probably re-examine why I'm the only person who sees this differently.

But in all your descriptions of Joanna's ghostliness, you've only demonstrated that she was a ghost unlike other ghosts previously seen on DS.

I'm glad that point finally came across.

What part of that translates into "...therefore, she must have been a Witch in life."

My posts may have been very unclear, but I did not think I made any such statement.  My post was intended as an open question ("Could she have been a witch?"), not a closed statement ("she must have been a witch").

There is no evidence that she was powerful in any way that a Witch might be.

Agreed, as stated in my posts.

I appreciate the information in Rainey's response which points up my lack of knowledge of witches.  I thought I had read and seen enough fictional representations of witches to have come up with an interesting (fictional) idea (at least within the context of DS), but if there are too many problems with the idea, then there's no point pursuing it.

Gothick presents a good suggestion regarding ghosts who have been killed by violence having special properties; this was also news to me, and that may have been all the writers had in mind.  Beyond this, I restate only my observation, which others may not find valid, that the ghost of Joanna Mills seemed to be a very special ghost (dare I say, "spellbinding" in her ability to deceive the living, the living dead, and the immortal), but I truly make no other conclusions.  (I use the term spellbinding loosely and do not intend to imply that the only explanation for this ability which I observe is that she must be a witch.)

I apologize if I was unfair in characterizing others' comments.

It's true that the very corporeal-appearing Sarah puzzles David and Victoria for que a while, but eventually even they realize that Sarah is a ghost.  Joanna Mills is different.  Not only does she fool all of the mortals, her true nature eludes even Barnabas, Angelique, and Judah -- the last two of which, especially, might be expected to recognize a ghost via their own supernatural powers and knowledge.  Since they don't, that suggests to methat Miss Mills has some special, unique properties setting her apart from many other ghosts.

Hi Vlad,  IMO I still believe that it was Joanna's deep love for Quentin that gave her the powers to return from the dead.  And when you look at the situation, she really didn't show any extradinary powers at all during the storyline.   Take Sarah for example, when Maggie was presumed dead by most of Collinwood and locked up in Wyncliff sanitarium, it was Sarah's ghost who found her and helped her escape.  Joanna couldn't even find her own sister Daphne when she was being help captive by Gabriel.  It seemed like her whole purpose there was to save Quentin from death.

Vlad Wrote:

Not only does she fool all of the mortals, her true nature eludes even Barnabas, Angelique, and Judah -- the last two of which, especially, might be expected to recognize a ghost via their own supernatural powers and knowledge.  Since they don't, that suggests to methat Miss Mills has some special, unique properties setting her apart from many other ghosts.

  As for Judah/Gerard not knowing Joanna was a ghost, I wouldn't give him too much credit for anything.  Remember, he didn't even know that Barnabas was a vampire!  It was only after Trask's meddling and complaining about his own father's mysterious death that he really began to suspect anything.  Even then, he didn't really didn't know anything and it wasn't until after he and Trask located Ben's diary, read about the secret in the old house basement, and then broke down the wall to find the skeleton that he finally found something out.  He couldn't find this out on his own?   He also never knew it was Gabriel who tried to kill him until after Gabriel's death when Daphne told everyone.

   I say the same for Angelique/Valerie too.  For the longest time she believed it was Quentin who was possessed by Judah.  And she certainly didn't think anything supernatural or strange upon meeting Gerard for the first time until he happened to call her "Miranda."   So as far as supernatural beings being able to recognize one another, I really don't have much faith in that.

  I wish that the writers hadn't left us hanging the way they did regarding Joanna and what happened to her. It seemed like she was only in this storyline for such a short time, where as the ghost of Sarah had been on the show for quite some time during her run and it took an awfully long time for anyone to even suspect that she wasn't human.


Cassandra
   

As far as Joanna goes, for some reason, and maybe this was in my mind only, I felt as if even Joanna had no clue she was dead for about 90% of the plot - kind of like Bruce Willis' character in the Sixth Sense. She simply thought she had come back for her lost love. It almost seems as if, at the last minute, the writers changed their minds (What a shock, DS writers changing a plot at the drop of a hat!! lol) and thought HEY wouldn't it be cool if she revealed she was a ghost after all (with a big glowing green face, I might add) before pitching Samantha off Widow's Hill?!?

I know what you mean about this.  I think it's because WE really have no clue for a long time as to what's going on with Joanna and WHAT she is.  What with the notes, the appearance of SOMEONE during that seance, her belongings turning up, etc.  There was a lot of ambiguity in the writing, I think, and I too got the impression that the writers did not have a clear idea about some things and made decisions as they went along.

Example:  Maybe it's just my read on it, but remember the scene with Samantha and Quentin, where he informs her that he will NEVER see Joanna again because she is dead??  Samantha's reaction comes across as true shock at the news and when she says she's sorry that she died, her emotions seem sincere - not those of someone who's pretending not to know something.  I think the writers hadn't decided yet to have had Samantha kill her.
Also....something doesn't seem right with this: (unless I missed something)
Ya know when Quentin went to the sanitarium to talk to the head guy, and he tells Quentin that Joanna had a visitor -- a young woman who seemed to upset her???  Then Quentin comes home and confronts Daphne....."I know who you are.  You're the sister of Joanna Mills!"  How exactly did he come to this conclusion?  It would seem after Samantha's confession to Gerard, that it was SAMANTHA who was the visitor at the sanitarium.

Anyway....

I'm going to write this fast -- I'm in the middle of final exams -- so I'm hoping some allowances can be made if I make a misstatement without having an attack launched.  These are only my ideas and I never meant to present them as the last word on the subject.

Hey Vlad   
If you wrote all this stuff "fast", I shudder at the possibilities of what you can come up with when you take your time!! 
It's succinct, cohesive and shows alot of creative thought (like ALL your posts).
Was looking over my post to see if I may have contributed to any "attack" type feelings.  Hope not.  (Funny how the simple assertion of an idea can take on a life of its own and spawn all this debate, no???)   

Was thinking maybe my laughing at the comment  concerning  "powers far beyond those of any ordinary dead person" might have given the impression I was making fun or something.   No no.  I thought the words just seemed amusing when you stand back and look at them.
It's like.....powers far beyond those of any ordinary, run-of-the-mill, everyday dead person.  lol   Then all I could hear in my head was, "Powers far beyond those of any mortal man.....SUPERMAN!!!"

Um, ahem......yeah, I know.   I'm nuts.

love
CLC

PS  Oh yeah -- the Widow's Hill thing.  Have no idea if it was Widow's Hill or not.  Just seemed like everyone takes their dive from there.  (It's a popular checking-out point).  rofl

    After reading everyone's comments it seems the witches in DS have been inept.  We have seen Angelique in all her forms screw-up.  The same could be said of Mr. Blair and Judah.  Bathia Mapes was a witch only because she said so.  She ended up toast.
     Now, take a look at the ghosts of DS.  Quentin was able to kill several people and take over the house.  Gerard's ghost destroyed the whole house.  Little Sarah saved several people from an evil vampire.  Jeremiah's ghost even terrorized Angelique.  Joanna seems just as strong as the other ghosts.
     

First, please let me say that the mods are very attuned to anything on the forums that resembles an attack.  We don't ignore claims of personal attack nor take the subject lightly.  Another issue that's near and dear to the hearts of the mods here is that debate is not argument; arguing does not make for a healthy debate.  After making their point(s), members should then allow others the chance to make theirs.  No one need get the last word (not counting when the mods lock the topic, hee hee, though of course that's only in extreme instances).  Both issues (personal attacks and arguing for argument's sake) are in the guidelines that all members must accept before posting.

But in all your descriptions of Joanna's ghostliness, you've only demonstrated that she was a ghost unlike other ghosts previously seen on DS.

I'm glad that point finally came across.

...

My posts may have been very unclear, but I did not think I made any such statement.  My post was intended as an open question ("Could she have been a witch?"), not a closed statement ("she must have been a witch").

Vlad, I did get your point in the first instance and though I know you like to return to clarify points already made I hope you'll realize that it's often not necessary.  I merely asked you which powers you were referring to; that's all.  I also realize that in the next instance you were asking a question, which was:

Might Miss Mills, as she is referred to, have been a witch in life?

and I replied:

I can't think of any evidence that supports the theory that Joanna was a witch.

I can't find anything wrong with my approach, sorry.  If this is what has you upset, then as moderator I have to request that if you're going to throw a question out in your posts, please be prepared to hear a "no" answer.  The same goes for providing theories, i.e. "food for thought"-- please be willing to hear an alternate theory in response.  Since reopening to guest traffic we've had 2 straight months with over 100,000 hits and this one is shaping up to be the same, so when a question is posed there's bound to be a reader with a different viewpoint on the subject, and other members are as welcome to share a contrary opinion as you are to introduce the subject.  Naturally, this applies to everyone.  One needs a somewhat thick skin before sharing viewpoints on a public internet forum, even one that's moderated.

As I wrote privately, I overstated things when I used the term "attack" in this post, and I apologize.  Also, I had a wider context in mind than just this thread, though no one could be expected to know that.

At the risk of repeating myself, though, it was not that I don't expect divergent comments and a variety of viewpoints.  I honestly can't think of any time that I have not been "willing to hear an alternate theory in response" ...  I would have left this forum a long time ago if that were the case. 

What I was responding negatively to was the feeling I had, justified or not, of being peppered with questions that felt like demands to account for my observations and explain myself, as if I had no right to even ask the question.  Perhaps outside pressures unduly contributed to my sense of being jumped on and feeling of irritation.

From now on, I'll consider that anything I post, no matter how innocuous I consider it to be, may elicit probing questions or be challenged in some way.  I'll reconsider posting when I don't have the personal time to deal fairly with a variety of possible responses.  I'll also reconsider posting anything at all when I'm unduly stressed or rushed or sleep deprived (as opposed to my normal state of feeling stressed or rushed or sleep deprived).  I don't want to end up an online discussion group casualty!  I think we've all witnessed that and it's not a pretty sight.   

.  .  .

Connie, it actually took a little longer than I thought it would when I started writing ... 

What I was responding negatively to was the feeling I had, justified or not, of being peppered with questions that felt like demands to account for my observations and explain myself, as if I had no right to even ask the question. 

Your description sounds to me like every other exchange of posts in any thread that generates many responses.  I consider it the desired response, when people write back pointing out issues in ones argument with which they cannot agree.   That's what makes it a discussion, as opposed to a monologue.   Of course name-calling is unacceptable....as are obviously snide and catty remarks.....but being asked to further explain/defend one's position is not an attack....it's an invitation to continue the dialogue.  In which case, we each have the choice of continuing......declaring we have nothing further to add.....or simply allowing someone else to have the last word.