(Also available from Starland mirror site)
First, some comments from previous columns . . .
(Note from Phil: I'll just stand over here in the corner for a few moments until the dust settles. ;-)
Jason Liu: I believe the class name, Valiant, for the Defiant is given in the book The Art of Star Trek. No, I didn't just pull that name out of the air!
Chris Ng: Please don't call Larry Nemecek! The Defiant's class IS Valiant! At least, according to the book 'The Art of Star Trek.' According to that, the Defiant was going to be named Valiant, but when 'Defiant' cropped up, they changed Valiant to the class name instead. One has to wonder, though...If the Defiant is the prototype (The Search, Part 1), then where's the Valiant?
Eddie C Marshall of Hampshire, UK: According to the canon "The Star Trek Fact File" the Defiant (NX-74205), is a Defiant-Class starship constructed at the Utopia Planetia fleet yards on Mars. Construction began in 2266 after Starfleet was alerted to the Borg threat, after the devestation at Wolf 359 Commander Benjamin Sisko was assigned to Utopia Planetia where he supervised the design and construction of the new class of starship. However after a shakedown cruise serious design flaws came to light showing that given the power and weaponry of the ship for its size it had the potential to rip itself apart this, along with the fact that Starfleet decided the threat from the Borg had diminished, (!), pursuaded Starfleet to suspend work on the Defiant class of starship.
Daniel Tyman: The starship name Valiant comes from TOS episode "Where No Man Has Gone Before." It was to be the original name of the Defiant. But, the executives at Paramount had Voyager scheduled to come out, and they didn't want to have two starships that had a name starting with the letter "V." So, it was almost a Valiant class ship.
Robert Beeler of Knoxville, TN: The official record (ie the Star Trek Chronology) says that the Defiant is a Defiant Class starship. I've also read somewhere (may not be official) that the NX registry number is reserved for the first ship of a class.
Mark Blankenship of Greenville, TX: In the episode where the Romulan-Cardie fleet attack the Founder's homeworld, there is a full screen close up of the Defiant's dedication plaque. On my tv I can make out the words "First Starship of Her Class" which should settle this matter forever.
Phil: Okay! My turn! Talked with Larry Nemecek. (Drumroll please.) The class of the Defiant is . . . Defiant!. An early possibility for the class was Valiant but that was changed. Larry's word is good enough for me since he knows stuff like this!
Murray Leeder: One of the best things to come out of Trek in the recent years is the possibility that the Federation can now be viewed as less than perfect. (I know Gene Roddenberry is now flailing about wildly in his orbital grave, but oh well) It gave us Quark's speech on why humans are worse than Ferengi in "The Jem'hadar", and Eddington's infamous "Worse than the Borg" speech in "For The Cause". (Not to mention that wonderful comparison of the Federation to root beer in "Way of the Warrior"...) But now we must have the fact that the Federation is sometimes haughty and discriminatory.
Jonathan Carter: In response to the discussion about Starfleet being 'racist' towards Ferengi and others: The basic problem with aliens in Star Trek is that normally all of the members of one race act alike. I can see why the creators have done that; imagine if the Ferengi had ten different cultures, each one completely different than the others. It'd be very confusing, especailly if all of the hundreds of Star Trek alien races were as complex as humans really are. So it's easier just to have one culture and belief system per race. That doesn't really justify the constant derision of the Ferengi, but it clears things up a little. Also, if you think about it, aliens in Star Trek aren't all that 'alien.' They act essentially like humans act, which makes it easier for viewers to identify with them, but isn't all that imaginative.
Phil: (Struck by a thought!) Hmmm. Given that Trek portrays most members of a give race as functionally the same, is it really racist to observe those qualities? Isn't racism really just the immediate assumption of characteristic based on race? If those assumptions are true in a fantasy universe, it is wrong to observed them? ;-)
Murray Leeder: "In The Cards" seems to indicate that only Earth is communistic-socialistic in the future, not the Federation. So, say... Starfleet pays Dax, but they don't pay Sisko. Weird.
Phil: Must be murder on the accountants. Unless, of course, they hire Ferengi or Cardassian accountants!
Murray Leeder: While I can see your point, I can also see why, in the circumstances of one's clone becoming a heinous criminal, many people would be seriously embarrassed by that! After all, it's possible that you're genetically dispositioned to that sort of thing!
Phil: Personally, I think were all "genetically disposed" toward unpleasantness. Look at any large organization--be it government, education, entertainment, religion, law enforcement, the judicial system. Isn't it true that--as a whole--when individuals are given power, they tend to abuse that power? For example, take email. Email is a form of plebian power. I--as an individual--can communicate with people around the world and I can do it with some anonimity. So what happens? A significant percentage of these normally sane individuals--when crossed--erupt with obscenity-laced, flaming messages, attacking the person that they perceive has crossed them. They say stuff they would never say to that person's face. Why? Because they have suddenly have the power to do so.
On to the questions . . .
Mike Konczewski of Havertown, PA: This question is probably rhetorical, but I thought I'd ask it anyway. During the VOY episode "Unity," Chakotay and Ensign Kaplan get into a fire fight with the aliens on the Un-Borged planet. The aliens begin firing their (I presume) phasers at C&K, so they immediately duck behind some cover and return fire. The aliens duck and cover as well.
Here's the question. I remember back in many TOS episodes that phasers can be set on vaporize. What's to stop someone from a phaser from vaporizing your cover, then doing whatever he/she/it wants to do with you? Or, if you're lazy, vaporize the cover and you along with it?
Okay, so let's say you're Janeway and you want to "take 'em alive." Whatever happened to "wide dispersal stun?" You don't need to make a direct hit; if I understand phaser technology, just grazing someone in the stun setting should take them out of commision. Is this another example of TOS technology being lost in the passage of time?
Phil: Yup! Of course, I have never understood why they can't just use a phaser like a firehose! Lay on that button and sweep everything! (I know, I know. It would probably run down the battery too fast!)
Jayson Spears: I just rewatched "Unification" for the 45th time and I have a question. As the Enterprise flys through the salvage yard, we see a bunch of wrecked ships. Right smack dab in the middle of it all, there is.......a Romulan battle cruiser( or a Klingon K'tinga class battleship if you choose.) My question....Why is it drifting in a Federation depot?
Phil: Couldn't tell ya! But . . . perhaps is was captured in battle?!
Danny Wiese: I just found the "Nitpick the Nitpicker" site on the net. After reading some of it I get the impression that the person who made it isn't a big fan of yours. And they don't follow the secondary directive. I was just wondering how you felt about this site, This person sounds like he's just bashing you and trying to discredit you. Some of the AntiNitPicks are wrong, a few contradict the Tech Manual.
Phil: One of the really great things about this country is that everyone has the right to express their own opinion! (Grin.) I always assumed that if the Guides went well that someone, somewhere would try to put out a Nitpicker's Guide to the Nitpicker's Guides. In fact, I used to joke about doing it myself! This is just life. Everyone is going to have their own viewpoint. Certainly, I don't expect everyone to agree with me all the time and there are going to be certain people out there who will never agree with me! Nothing wrong with that in the world. After all, it's only television!
Scott Vogt: Phil, while surfing this weekend I've found alot of references to the death of Princess Di, to pray for her, etc.. Now when I first heard the story, the first thing I thought was that I felt bad for her kids. It's bad enough to lose a parent as a child, but to be in the public eye as well. Anyway, in all those tributes and prayers, I never saw mention of the 2 other innocent people who also lost their lives. Don't they count? She's a public figure so she deserves prayers. I just dislike hypocrisy. So my prayers go to the families of all three victims of this tragic accident. Also Phil, what's your take on the media hounding celebrities?
Phil: Point well taken on the other two who lost their lives! As far as the media hounding celebrities goes, the easiest thing here is to find a scapegoat and absolve the rest of us of duplicity. But . . . I'm hesitant to lay the blame on the paparazzi when there are magazine publishers who pay exhorbitant sums of money for pictures and there are business who pay the magazine publishers to advertise beside and around those pictures and there are people who are willing to fork over cash to goggle the pictures, while in the process being influenced by the advertisement. When you strip it all away, I think the basic problems that result in the media hounding celebrities are the same problems that have vexed humanity for a very long time: greed, envy, jealousy. While you might be able to curb the manifestations of those problems through legislation, you'll never curb them until you implement an inner monitor to stop the behavior before it starts. (And that's why I wouldn't be surprised if my clone went out and did bad things. As I said last week, a few tweeks here and there--a reduction or elimination of my inner monitor--and I wouldn't want to be around me!) And . . . since the American society at large seems averse to limiting its own behavior, I would guess that there will be some hand-wringing over this issue and then once life settles down, everything will go back to the way it was because there's money in "them thar" photos.
Murray Leeder: Did you notice any nits on X-Files relating to the fact that Mulder's red-green colour-blindness? I ask because I presume you have a similar condition.
Phil: I am red-green color-blind. It's more of a nuisance than anything else and it only shows up under incandescent or fluorescent light with certain shades of color. For instance, there's a card game called Phase 10. The card colors are: red, green, gold and orange. I can barely tell the difference between the red and the green but which cards are gold and which are orange is a complete mystery to me!! Now, if I take the cards and put them in direct sunlight--and I squint--I can just barely make them out. That's why my wife and I went through the deck and marked them! I was losing games because I couldn't tell what was what. But . . . aside from stuff like that, no one would ever know that I was red/green color-blind unless I told them. So, there really aren't many nits that you can pick with something like this. (Unless, of course, Mulder ever plays Phase 10 on the show and even then he might have a different kind of red/green color-blindness than I do.) There was one item. In "Home," Mulder discusses the purity of his genetic ancestry and claims that the Mulders pass genetic muster. He probably just forgot about this little flaw in his genes!
Mark Blankenship of Greenville, TX: Has anyone made a list of the cameos anywhere for First Contact? Ones I've seen include Mark Lenard as the Vulcan ship lands, the singer on the holodeck looks like Michele Phillips, and of course there is the actor that does Neelix. Just wondering if anyone else saw these or if I'm delusional.
Phil: I noticed Ethan Philips but I don't believe Mark Lenard was the Vulcan. As to Michelle Phillips as the holodeck singer, not sure!
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.