karenjo

Outa My Head

So, what do y'all think? After seeing Captain Archer land his left fist squarely in Shran's face, is our hero left-handed?

Have we seen any other instances of Archer favoring his left hand? Somebody who's taped some episodes, check out some Captains' Mess scenes: does he hold his fork in his right hand or his left?

What about other starship captains? Lefties or righties?

The fate of the universe hangs on you answers...

Whether it was intended or not, the 'Pink-skin' epithet makes us think...about all labels.  And IMO, that's what Trek should do.  Set up a Sci-Fi situation and challenge us to think.[/color]

Well stated, Trinneergirl. This is trektalk at its best. IDIC.

Sorry perhaps I should have limited the quotation only to the part of your post that I was referring. My comments were made towards the following part of your original post and it was on this point that it appeared to me to be animosity rather than prejudice:

 

By the way, Did Trip call the Andorians "blueheads" during one scene, or did I dream that? Just goes to show (assuming I didn't dream it), we all have our prejudices.

 

Regarding the latter part of your post:

 

"Archer admitted that he didn't trust Andorians in general"

 

I agree that this could be determined an prejudice but considering that Archer has had a amount of experience with them then I would rather define it as a generalisation, as prejudice would require a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.

Thanks for the clarification. You sent me scrambling for my dictionary, which proved that you are correct: "prejudice" is indeed either a preconceived judgment made before gathering all the facts, or an irrational hatred or suspicion of a specific group -- the key word being "irrational."

Now, for the difference between "prejudice" and "generalization": it would seem to be a matter of degree. Both make broad assumptions about a group, perhaps based on one's experience with members of that group, or perhaps based on hearsay. Hmm, maybe we should define it this way: when I do it, it's a generalization; when you do it, it's a prejudice.

But seriously: when does a generalization cross the line and move into prejudicial territory? Does the line shift during wartime or time of personal peril? Are some generalizations justified? Are there times when even prejudices are justifiable?

I am not trying to start a war here, but I do enjoy thoughtful and thought-provoking debate. Trek has always given us a forum to consider the ethical dilemmas of our own time; it simply places those dilemmas into a future setting. Archer, Kirk, Picard, et al R Us!

...we all have our prejudices.  Even Archer admitted that he didn't trust Andorians in general...

I'm not sure I would call it prejudice as they do have blue skin so it is not really a preconceived idea.

Hmm...allow me to clarify.

Noting the fact that Andorians have blue skin is not a prejudice.

Stating one's distrust of an entire group of people based on their membership in that group is a prejudice.

We all have prejudices. I have a prejudice towards my children: I firmly believe that they are the best, the brightest, the most well-behaved of their kind. Um, well, maybe nix that "the most well-behaved." :P I also have a prejudice against eating octopus, or for that matter, anything with suction cups on its appendages. These are fairly benign prejudices. My mental red flags start going up when I notice myself acting on (or even silently acknowleging) a prejudice against a human being. It can be racial, of course, or it can be based on accent, hair style, clothing, occupation, age, political affiliation, military affiliation (or lack thereof), etc., etc.

Archer has a prejudice against Andorians. And that's a good, healthy thing for him to have. He can't risk his crew's lives and their mission by trusting a people who, so far, have proven untrustworthy. What's admirable about Archer is that, after acknowledging his prejudice, he is able to rise above it enough to give an individual a chance to prove himself.

Shran is an interesting character partly because, while he is one hundred percent Andorian and loyal to the Andorian system, he refuses to remain locked into the Vulcan/human stereotype of Andorians. (By the way, Shran certainly does have his prejudices against both Vulcans and "pinkskins.") And while he and Archer do not completely trust each other because their alliances are to different groups, it's clear that they do respect each other as individuals.

By the way, Archer also has a prejudice against the Xindi. He'd better. In wartime, political correctness is a perilous luxury. However, Archer was able to rise above even that prejudice, forming that uneasy alliance with the Xindi Sloth who ended up sabotaging the Ultimate Weapon. Interesting, hmm?

As the Vulcans of Spock's era will say: IDIC, y'all. (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations)

Just a speculation about the Andorians: Wonder if they have dark-skinned people as the humans and Vulcans (Tuvok in VOY) do? Obviously, the blue tint to the skin of Shran et al is due to their blue blood, just as Caucasians' "pink" skin is due to the red blood showing through very light skin. Darker pigmentation would obscure the tinge caused by the blood.

A related speculation: What makes Andorian blood blue? Ours is red because it's iron-based; I believe Vulcan blood is copper-based and therefore green. (Wasn't there a species in a TOS episode with silicon-based blood?) :P

And a related nitpick: If Andorian blood is blue, wouldn't their tongues be a darker blue instead of that dark pink? And wouldn't the "whites" of their eyes have a blue tinge instead of a pink one? I know, the contrast is more striking this way. Esthetics must win out over science every time! :P

Jeffrey's performances energizes everything and everybody.  He makes Bakula better because they crackle when they clash. We weren't hammered over the head with conflicted Shran.  We were shown. 

 

I loved that Reed got decent, meaningful screen time for a change and wasn't that a suprisingly lovely scene between Trip and Shran?  Those kind of character moments have been lamentably few this season.

MR has hit the nail squarely on its proverbial head. Those of us who have been clamoring for character development mean exactly what we got last night: demonstration, not explanation, of motivations and emotions. It's what jefffitz refers to as "unspoken dialogue." As one of my mentors says, "Show, don't tell." Love the verb "crackle," moulin -- that's exactly what Shran and Archer do together.

I gave "Proving Ground" a nine. That's darn good for me. The only episodes I've given tens are "Dawn" and "Twilight."

Love those Andorians! :P

Has it occurred to anyone that there's more than a little irony in debating the inclusiveness of a racial slur? Do we think Travis and Hoshi would be offended by being excluded from Shran's perjorative? :P

I do like the idea of Shran starting to slam Travis with the name "pinkskin" and halting midword, confused. That has potential!

By the way, Did Trip call the Andorians "blueheads" during one scene, or did I dream that? Just goes to show (assuming I didn't dream it), we all have our prejudices. Even Archer admitted that he didn't trust Andorians in general, although he trusted Shran...which turned out to be a big mistake. Good thing he didn't trust him implicitely.

Also by the way, I hope we haven't seen the last of my favorite blueskin...bluehead...um, Shran. He's great. :P

L.A. Confidential

Stripper

G.O.D.

Rain Man

Everybody Plays the Fool Sometimes

I realize this isn't startrek.com, where I used to love to post parodies. (My personal favorites were a Season Three spoof based on The Night Before Christmas, and a take-off on Macbeth's "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" speech that was posted by one mmaola.) Still, I thought I'd give it a shot.

(It's sort of a test...if this post gets censured because I said "fart," I'm outa here.)

Sing to “Mamas, Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up to be Cowboys”

Xindis aren't easy to love, at least not the reptiles.

Weird scaly faces that cover a brain packed with wiles.

Wire shoulder pads and those forehead protrusions:

A costume designer’s nightmare.

It’s too bad they’re bald, because it sure couldn’t hurt

To cover those faces with hair.

Mamas, don’t let your daughters go marryin’ Xindis.

‘Cause they pick their noses and fart in airlocks,

Never wash jockeys or sweatbands or socks.

Mamas, don’t let your sons go a-marryin’ Xindis,

The girls all have cobras and adders for hair –

Think what your grandkids would be!

This season is suffering from a lack of humor and yes humor is possible even in bleak circumstances.

Good Lord, yes. Remember M*A*S*H? Humor is not only possible in bleak circumstances, it's absolutely vital.

My husband says Trip is a hothead. I say he's just impetuous, which is just one of the things that makes him so loveable. :(

Okay, seriously. I thought Archer's handling of Trip's near-outburst was appropriate and necessary. Having said that, I must add that I wish Trip would arrange to show *Captain and Commander* on movie night, so that Archer could get a look at Captain Jack Aubrey's method of management. Aubrey is every inch the authority figure, and would never stand for some of the insubordination that Archer tolerates from Reed et al. However, Aubrey also jokes with his crew, teases them at Captain's mess (if you've seen the movie, you'll recognize the line, "the lesser of two weevils"), and inspires their confidence by being approachable and accessible. It's a fine line, one that Kirk and Picard both walked well. Methinks Archer's "approachablility" rating has slipped this season.

Come on people please play nice or this post will have to be closed, and I'm sure no one wants that.

Play nice? Is honest debate outlawed over here? Are you people that sensitive?

I think folks are referring to a scene in which T'Pol grabbed one of the fanatics around the neck from behind. She was summarily yanked off him by another religious nut-type and held at phaser point. Two problems: One, if she'd been serious, she wouldn't have used locked her arms around his neck like a five-year-old wrestling with Daddy, she'd have used the gosh-darn Vulcan pinch. And two, Mr. Religious Nut-Type wouldn't have merely held her at phaser point, he'd have vaporized her.

Y'all are right; T'Pol needs to take calcium supplements or something, anything to develop a backbone. Archer's done it; it's her turn now.

P.S. The worst example of Spineless T'Pol wasn't even physical. It was in "Twilight," where our damsel-in-distress tried to command the Enterprise and subsequently allowed Trip to be insubordinate as all get-out, not to mention letting the crew, the ship, and the mission go to hell in a shuttlepod. No way. With that withering look of hers? The computer brain? The superior strength? No, no, no. She'd have had Trip in the brig (yes, he's good at what he does, but no mission hangs on the abilities of one person) faster than he could say, "Grits and red-eye gravy."

Great! :blink: Check out my new poll!

Just a fun thought, arising from the thread on relationships. If people are interested, I may post some other polls about other characters' reading habits.

By the way, this is off-hours reading. No professional material (e.g., Scotty and his technical journals) allowed!

I agree with much of what has been said, especially with the feeling that any supposed sexual tension between characters has been overplayed. We need to get to know the characters as people first, and then maybe we can believe that certain ones would be attracted to each other. And even then, it can be overdone. I agree with whoever-it-was who said they got bored with the soap opera romances between Worf and Dax, and Parris and B'Lana, et cetera. As much as I laughed about Kirk and his femme-du-jour, I prefer that to a Harlequin Romance Novel set in space.

Bottom line: in the context of a science fiction/action series, give us some characters with depth. Think of it this way: we knew the characters from TOS and TNG so well that we can well imagine what sorts of novels they would read in their spare time. Try to imagine the same about the ENT characters. Can you do it? I can with a couple (Hoshi: Great Expectations; Trip: Ender's Game), but not with most of them (Archer, T'Pol, Reed, the ever-silent Mayweather: I haven't a clue).

This is a great thread. Thanks for starting it, unicornhunter.

I agree, character development is suffering bigtime this season. I like action and shoot-em-ups as much as the next guy/gal, but I have always watched Trek primarily to get to know the people. Trip Tucker is my favorite ENT character, and not because I like seeing him shirtless (although I do). He's my favorite because of his impetuousness, his honesty (often to a fault), and his habit of being ruled by his gut and not his head. He's both strong-man-in-charge and little-boy-lost, a classic combination that has worked for countless characters in film and literature, from Ender of Orson Scott Card fame to James Kirk of TOS. And his emotional bent was a good balance to T'Pol's intellect in seasons one and two. That balance is part of what gave promise to the Tucker-T'Pol-Archer trio: Archer as the leader, guided by his emotional conscience (Tucker) and his intellectual one (T'Pol). If you're reminded of the McCoy-Spock-Kirk trio, you're right.

Having said that, I have to yell, scream, and stomp my feet about the lack of development of these and other characters this season. We've had some glimpses into Tucker's motivations, in past episodes like "Dawn" and "Cogenitor." This season began with some memories of his sister, a poignant look at his family ties and the people he loves. Then...nothing. "Similitude," as someone said earlier, gave us great insight into the clone, but not the original. This season's only other character-developing episodes have been "Exile" and "Twilight" -- both good ones, which shows that it can be done.

As for the relationships between characters, I found the first-season sexual tension between T'Pol and Archer intriguing, especially given their acknowlegement of its existence and their resolve not to act upon it. If T'Pol and Tucker actually enter into a sexual liason, I won't believe it. I haven't been given enough insight into her character to understand how or why she would be attracted to him. And all I know about his attraction to her is that he likes her body. That's believable enough, but that's a good reason for one night in the sack, not for a relationship. I took notice when he gave her a peach one episode (remember the peach scene in Tom Sawyer?) -- that had potential. Unfortunately, the writers dropped that line of thinking too. I'm left with half-developed hints at characters' backgrounds and motivations, and I'm frustrated.

WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? WHY ARE THEY IN STARFLEET? WHAT ARE THEIR PASSIONS? WHERE ARE THEIR LOYALTIES? WHAT ARE THEIR DREAMS -- BOTH HOPES AND NIGHTMARES? WHAT LOSSES HAVE THEY SUFFERED? WHAT ARE THEIR TRIUMPHS? These are the big questions; the little ones are just as important. We know Tucker likes key lime pie. That's a start. Give us more!

I just re-watched this episode and I still don't see what was so bad about this episode. I think it's a real good episode..Did they really put down religion in everybody's eyes ? I just don't see that they did..Only this one alien fanatical religious group..Does anybody see any similarities with any religion here on Earth ? Are there religious groups here that are that fanatical and oblivious to what they are doing? Not that I know of..

 

The only problem I have with the episode is how easily T'Pol was pushed aside. But I've convinced myself it's because she thought they would blow up the ship if she resisted..

That may be harder to answer than it seems because it involves being able to see things from someone else's perspective. Try not to think so much of the specific analogy of this fanatical group to a specific religion and more of how Archer and T'Pol discussed these people's beliefs before any of the trouble started.

 

I'm editing this - the truth is I sensed a very heavy handed condescending attitude toward religion - all I can tell you is how I felt. I truly believe they would never insult other groups like that or apologize if they did but in Hollywood insulting religion seems to be acceptable fare.

 

I also get disgusted with Hollywood in general because they always choose the most radical, non-representative religious person they can find to discuss religion rather than the hundreds of thousands of normal persons of faith.

 

As for T'Pol, I've said before they never really intended to make her a real character but rather a convenient body to throw around whenever it suits them.

Responding to TheUnicornHunter's observation that Hollywood loves to present the most radical religious types as the norm: Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. At least DS9 made an attempt, in the beginning, to show Kira's religion as viable -- but as time went on, even the religion of the Prophets was presented as radical and corrupt. Where are the "normal" religious types? And how many times have I glanced over at my husband during an episode of ST (any ST) and said, "They need a chaplain"? (Hint: more than I have eyeballs.) This from someone who's experienced firsthand the need for a spiritual leader aboard ship. Hollywood really should get over the idea that religious people are, by definition, nutsy-cuckoo, and as such, are the last group it's pc to deride. Well, one of the last groups. There are a few others, but I won't go there tonight.

Yes, I'm ba-a-a-a-ack! At least for the time being...

"Chosen Realm" did not live up to its considerable potential. As one poster has said, there were echoes of "Let This Be Your Last Battlefield" (TOS), but this remake was sophomoric in its slamming of religion. Make no mistake, all religion was slammed here. As another poster pointed out, it was certainly "unreal" that the split between factions occurred because of a disagreement over whether the expanse was created in 8 or 9 days. That was a direct punch at the Christian Church's split over the date of Easter...but the truth is, the divide was over much, much larger issues than that. To say otherwise is a gross oversimplification. Unfortunately, when Hollywood looks at religion, any religion, oversimplification is the name of the game.

As to more mundane matters: As many have pointed out, there were too many inconsistencies regarding security. How could the hijackers know how to aim, fire, and power down weapons but be clueless about navigation and transporters? How could an unauthorized person delete crucial records so easily? Hasn't anyone aboard ENT ever heard of backup files?

Mundane matter number two: WHERE WAS HOSHI? Good Lord, even Mayweather got more air time than she did. Now that's scary.

I agree with Moulin Rouge that Archer is much more admirable when he's kicking a little rear end. I, too, like the tougher, meaner, more focused Archer. And like Moulin Rouge, I'd rather the Cap'n stay off his high horse and out of the pulpit. He doesn't preach well.

Best moment in this episode: When the fanatic promised to pray for Archer, and Archer responded with a tight-jawed, "Save your breath." I wouldn't have crossed him at that moment.

Hey, these icons are fun. I'll try not to get carried away.