(Also available from Starland mirror site)
First, some comments from previous columns . . .
Katrina Pipinis: Here's another video jacket nit. The DS9 cover for the episodes "The Assignment" (I think) and "Trials & Tribble-ations" shows Sisko, Dax and Bashir in the classic Trek uniforms. The nit is in the insignias in their uniforms. Sisko's is the star (that's right), Dax's should be the claw (that's what I call it), and Bashir's should be the circles. But instead, the artist put the claw on Bashir's insignia, and the circles on Dax's. But they did get it right in the episode itself, at least.
Chris Lund: James Cromwell played the jailkeeper in "The Hunted", Jaglom Schreck in "Birthright", and Zefram Cochrane in "First Contact". (The movie not the TNG episode.)
Glenn St-Germain of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada : There is a web site for the show Law & Order which has a list of actors who have shown up in more than one role in that series. And there are several actors who have appeared in the old Mission: Impossible series (seen late night weeknighs around here) in more than one role, including Mark Lenard and William Shatner. Seems to me that recycling actors is common practice in television.
Phil: It does make sense from a business viewpoint! The guest actors already know the drill, have already worked with the leads and if they get along, why not use them again!
Matthew Chase Maxwell: Vulcan was the Roman name for the Greek god Hephaestus, the god of volcanic fire. Others refer to him as the god of the forge, a holy blacksmith if you will.
Robert Cook of Anacortes, WA: Vulcan was originally the Roman god of fire. He was thrown off Olympus by Zeus, and ended up living in a cave, making Zeus's thunderbolts, and much of the weaponry of Gods. Vulcan was also used as the name of a human space colony in an early episode of Doctor Who.
Phil: Thanks as well to Murray Leeder and Erin Hunt for sending this information along!
Kate M., Fl: I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet, but the word "Vedic" comes from the Far East. I saw it in the book Lord Caitanya In Five Features (sorry, I can't underline.) I was doing some research, hit that paragraph, and thought of you guys.
Corey Hines, Hamilton, ON: First, not wanting to be arrogant, but this was my comment. The question I asked was why the Defiant still has a registry of NX when the fleet clearly showed two other Defiant-class starships. One would think the design was approved and that production of others were authorized. Therefore not making the Defiant a prototype anymore thus giving it a registry of NCC.
Phil: I think this one comes down to opinion. It seems reasonable to me that the Defiant might be a special case when it comes to NX versus NCC--especially if they never really got the design bugs worked out. On the other hand, "Shattered Mirror" seems to indicate that Sisko and company did fix the Defiant since Alt-O'Brien wanted Sisko to fix the Alt-Defiant. Just another one of those odd little details that hasn't been resolved!
Michael Ash: I believe it's "All I ask is a tall ship, and a star to steer her by."
Shane Cathcart of Sydney Australia: After much searching, I found a picture of the USS Defiant's Commission Plaque which is located behind and to the left of Captain Sisko's command chair. I hope this helps answer Murray's question.
The Commission plaque has the following:
Registry: NX-74205. Commission date: 47170.2
Location of Construction: Southern Cross Fleet Yards, Pluto
Motto: "Behold! I am become death, the destroyer of worlds...." (This
is an ancient Hindu proverb.)
Chris Whitehead: According to TV Guide's Star Trek 30 Years "Official Collector's Edition" book (Canadian Edition, page 23, just to the right of the caption under Captain Janeway's picture), the motto on the plaque of the Defiant comes from the poem "Sea Fever" by John Masefield and reads "And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by."
Phil: Sounds like it's time to call my buddy Larry Nemecek and find out for sure!
Todd Felton: Here's something I was thinking of with regard to Borg 'names', or designations. Hugh, we learn, was called "Third of Five". This new Voyager Borg character will be called "Seven of Nine". Shouldn't that be "SevenTH of Nine"? Hugh wasn't "_Three_" of Five, he was *Third* of Five.
Phil: No doubt this is due to some highly complex and intricate Borg naming conventions.
On to the questions . . .
Scott Vogt, Cedar Rapids, IA: Who else wonders about Voyager's next season? If the Borg are a recurring threat, how can they do any other kind of show and be credible? For example, what planets can they possibly stop at that wouldn't be Borg? They're shooting themselves in the foot story-wise or they'll say, "Forget credability! I've got a story to tell!" Does anyone see my point? I mean that was the whole point of "Scorpion"- We can't go around Borg space! What new aliens could we possibly see?
Phil: Hmmm. Seems like a problem doesn't it? But I'm just the little nitpicker so I think I'll wait until they put the story on the screen before I do my thing! Everyone else is welcome to speculate however. (Maybe it will be something like "The Worlds the Borg Forgot"?)
John Reese: I was just re-reading your DS9 Guide and came to the part where Bashir says that tricorders are accurate on the living but not on the dead. He said this when Kira was amazed that he was able to revive someone that her tricorder said was dead. This got me thinking... If this is true, what are the possible readings someone would get on a tricorder? If they were alive, the instrument would always say the person were alive, since it is accurate on the living. If they were dead, it might either say they are dead or alive since it is NOT accurate on the dead. Conversely, if the tricorder reads "alive" then the person might be either alive or dead; if it reads "dead", then you KNOW they are dead! Otherwise, the tricorder would ACCURATELY report that they are alive. This also brings up the question of why they keep describing a person as dead BEFORE they attempt to revive them. Obviously, medicine in the Star Trek era is advanced enough that they can revive someone that is pretty far gone. Wouldn't the definition of "dead" be a little different in this case? Wouldn't they wait until all options for revival had been explored before they described the person as dead? What do you think?
Phil: I think Star Trek suffers from the same thing as the X-Files. If you ever find yourself in either universe remember this simple rule: Don't let yourself laspe into unconsciousness! Better yet, don't even go to sleep because both universes are notorious for pronouncing people "dead and beyond any hope of resuscitation" much too quickly!
R.F. van Hulst: I don't know if you have heard about it, but a British university recently published the findings of a research into Star Trek Fandom. One of the findings was that 10% of Star Trek fans are so "addicted", that if they don't watch Star Trek regularly, they are beginning to display withdrawal symptoms just like drug addicts. Jay Leno also told about it on the Tonight Show. He said there was one difference between Star Trek fans and drugaddicts: the drugaddicts were less annoying! What do you think about this whole story?
Phil: I think if you invest yourself in anything for long enough and put your complete faith and hope in it--be it science, religion, football, chocolate or Trek--you can cause your existence to become so dependent on it that you have no context without it. That people could become that dependent on Trek doesn't surprise me a bit. I think it merely demonstrates that we all are looking for something to "make us feel special." (And this is one of the reasons that you see the theme of redemption running through a lot of literature be it the reconciliation of family members or the "cleansing" action of a disaster.)
Corey Hines, Hamilton, ON: How large is Voyager? With scale with people, it looks like it's about the size of the original Enterprise. Is there a metre distance stated?
Phil: I'm sure this has been discussed in the Communicator or other similar magazines. Seems like I remember reading somewhere that it was one quarter the size of the Enterprise but I wouldn't swear to it! Anyone else have any information on this?
Fred Purdue of Edwards, CA: My son recently got your books on Star Trek and the Next Generation and I'd like to see if you could answer a question that has been nagging me for years. In the original Star Trek episode "The Omega Glory" Spock says to Kirk a comment similar to "this planet fought the nuclear war your Earth managed to avoid". Yet in The Next Generation, including the movie First Contact, references are made to a nuclear war having been fought in the 21st century. Is this a legitimate nitpick or did I get this wrong?
Phil: Well . . . I just did a cursory scan of "The Omega Glory" but I couldn't find Spock's comment. During the jail scene, Spock does say that Omega IV mostly like suffered a nuclear or biological war. Later, however, McCoy identifies it as a devestating biological war. I could have missed the comment that you refer to and if it's there then, yes, it's a nit!
Wells P. Martin: TOS episode Metamorphosis established that Cochrane was from Alpha Centuri. So, how is it that he is on Earth in First Contact ? No attempt is made at explaining his presence there.
Phil: I'm not sure that "Metamorphosis" actually established that Cochrane was from Alpha Centauri. If I recall the line is something "Zephrane Cochrane of Alpha Centauri?!" He certainly could have moved to Alpha Centauri after his "discovery" of warp drive (which the Vulcan apparently already had). I realize that there are materials out there that definitively state that Cochrane was from Alpha Centauri but I don't think that they are canonical. And, as I recall, "Metamorphosis" seems to indicate that Cochrane has a hankering to return to Earth.
Gordon Davie of Edinburgh, Scotland: Has it ever been established why the bridge on the original Enterprise is built at an angle? The turbolift isn't directly behind Kirk's chair; it's a little to his left. But since it's on the centreline of the ship (it's the little projection at the rear of the circular part on top of the saucer in exterior shots) this means the entire bridge doesn't face forward but to the left of centre. This is shown clearly in the Franz Joseph blueprints, which have the bridge offset 36 degrees counterclockwise. Was this a deliberate decision by the creators (and if so, why?) or was it just a case of trying to make the interior set fit the exterior of the model?
Phil: Couldn't tell ya! I know it was certainly a surprise to me the first time I looked at the blueprints! Interestingly enough, the first pilot, "The Cage" opens with a zoom in on the model of the Enterprise that dissolves to a shot of the bridge and if the pictures are correctly oriented the bridge wasn't offset at 36 degrees! (Maybe someone forgot to give the bridge that extra turn? No doubt it came loose and they fix it?!)
Jen MacDonald: This has been bugging me for a while now, so I'll get it off my chest and see if anyone can give me an answer. In the Next Generation, Data doesn't have a last name. My question is why not? He knows who built him so I think it would only make sense for him to adopt Dr. Soong's last name. On top of that, Data wants and tries to be more human, and all the human's I know have a last name. Does this make sense at all? Any explanations for this would be greatly appreciated.
Phil: "Data Soong" sounds like a keeper to me but evidently "Data" is his last name. I believe "Conundrum" has a computer screen that shows Data as "Data, NFN NMI." ("No First Name," "No Middle Initial")
Pam Van Allen: [Concerning the Dalai Lama on the video cover of "The Ensigns of Command,"] What video cover is he talking about? I have been looking for this pic for years, and asked Brent at a convention about the visit. Brent said that he wasn't aware that the DL himself had been with the group of monks, but perhaps he had not introduced himself as such. I was tempted to ask Brent why he didn't know what the DL looks like, but I restrained myself. I do know what the DL looks like, and I have been wanting to see that picture to figure out if his Holiness was there or not.
Phil: I believe this picture was only released on the video covers in the United Kingdom. (At least, I've only heard about it from nitpickers in England!)
Lisa B: What is meant by WHIRL and DIETS?
Phil: Those terms come from the Nitpickers Guild Glossary. They stand for "Wouldn't Happen In Real Life" and "Dead In Exactly Two Seconds" respectively.
Danny Evenwel of Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Can you replicate latinum? It is, after all, just a type of metal...Or does the computer have some kind of protection which prevents this?
Phil: Apparently latinum cannot be replicated but the creators have never given us a canonical reason for this. At least one Star Trek novel talks of it's complicated crystalline structure.
Scott Vogt: Just curious about your term Kirkanization. Don't you think the creators are between a rock and a hard place here? If they don't "Kirkanize" her, would you have coined "Picardanization"? In other words, aren't Kirk and Picard kind of opposite sides of the same coin? So any new captain would have to be close to one or the other. Can't we assume they are trying to find their niche for Janeway? Why haven't we heard this about Sisko? He could certainly be described as a cowboy. But don't get me started on Sisko, he's a mental case. Re: "For The Uniform".
Phil: My main amusement in all of this comes from the "mid-course corrections." Imagine for a moment that you're reading a novel--a good one--and the characterization radically changes in the middle of it for no other reason that to make the novel more interesting! I can't speak for other writers but for myself, I have a pretty good handle on who the main characters are before I start to write the story. Granted, I learn more about them as I'm going along but sometimes, with Star Trek, it feels like the character are just thrown into a show with the attitude, "well . . . if the fans don't like them . . . we'll just change them!"
On the matter of Kirk and Picard being two sides of the same coin. There is an amazing amount of variation in characterization. There are so many quirks and turns that a writer can put into the generic archetypes that I think there's lots and lots of "mixtures" that could be created for a starship captain. Look at Jelico from "Chain of Command." Granted he wasn't the most pleasant person in the world but he was a viable captain figure. And--given good writing--I think his character could have even carried a series!
Have a great weekend, everybody!
If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Question" in the Subject line. (Remember the legalese: Everything you submit becomes mine and you grant me the right to use your name in any future publication by me.)
Copyright 1997 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.