First, some comments from previous columns . . .
Television Series Cross-Overs
Beginning with Omer Belsky's comments in the 3/20/98 column
Joe Griffin: [Concerning television shows criticizing Trek fans,] It could also be self-deprecating humor (The TV industry directing mockery at itself...)
Phil: Perhaps. Or it could be jealousy. ;-)
Charles Cabe: I was wondering, given that the X-Files, Star Trek, and Star Wars have been placed in the same universe, could M*A*S*H* and Star Trek be connected. I know little about the details of MASH. But two TNG ships, the SS Birdseye (From the "Neutral Zone") and the Yamato, have the same names as charaters on MASH. (Birdseye is the name of boss of the 4077 and Dr. Yamato is a surgeon they borrowed from the 8063 in exchange for Winchester. A good trade I might add.) The Birdseye is listed by name in the Chronology.
Phil: I don't think that anyone has ever established a link to MASH aside from the inferences.
John Moar: Regarding crossovers between TV and comics:
I haven't seen it, but the idea of crossing Star Trek and the X-Men seems rather silly too me - far too many cans of worms open in both.
However, something I'd like to see in a comic sometime would be a crossover between a sitcom and a Superhero ('Friends' with anything New York-based would be a good example). Partly this would be the usual characters-meeting thing, but I'd also love to see the sitcom characters just accepting the hero as part of their world, which seems like a subtler joke than finding him ridiculous.
I agree with Phil's comments about the hypocrisy of insulting SF fans. Plus, they never seem to realise how argumentative we can be :-)
Mike Deeds: I assume other people have already submitted the possible X-Files/Simpsons nit from the episode "The End". In the episode, a boy is shown watching The Simpsons on TV. So, this implies that The Simpsons are fictional in The X-Files universe. If you assume that The Simpsons episode with Mulder and Scully establishes both in the same fictional universe, then the scene is an obvious nit. However, if you don't accept a cartoon link (which I don't), you must assume that there was no XF episode of The Simpsons in the XF universe. Question: Would you consider this scene a nit? If people are interested and Phil permits it, here is the address of the magazine that contains a letter that shows you can link The X-Files (through the Homicide-St. Elsewhere link) to over thirty different shows including Ellen, Murphy Brown, Newhart, The Drew Carey Show, and Home Improvement among many others. Their address is: Spectrum, 1912 E. Timberview Lane, Arlington, TX 76014. The issue in question is #12 (Jan. 1998) and costs $6.50 postage paid from the publisher. The issue also includes an extensive episode guide/review of the short-lived TV show Roar!. Past issues have contained episode guides/reviews of genre shows such as Xena, X-Files, Strange Luck, and Lois & Clark. It is a very good although relatively unknown magazine.
Phil: Concerning the Simpons/X-Files crossover and subsequent "un-crossover" in "The End," I probably would not list it as a nit but rather put it in the Ruminations section!
Brian: In the second Law & Order/Homicide crossover, Bayliss has a lack of concern for Kincaid. Two seasons ago, in the first crossover, Bayliss was awfully sweet on her. Maybe he moved on. Or maybe he already knew she was dead. But then why didn't Bayliss show up in the next season's premeire?
Bullies on the Playground and the End of the Nitpicker's Guides
Beginning with Phil Farrand's comments at the end of the 5/15/98 column
Charles Cabe: About the "death" of the Nitpicker's guides. I'm sorry that there will be no more guides. (But Spock died and came back, and Scotty, and Kirk, not to mention Mulder...)
Todd Pence: I was just catching up with the newsletters and heard about the discontinuation of your books. I would like to express my condolences and hope that the reading pleasure you gave me in the past with your TOS and TNG guides is some consolation. I share your outrage toward Paramount and have decided to hereafter personally boycott the company's movies and products as much as possible. A pathetic gesture, I realize, but it's as much as I can do. I hope that you will be able to continue the nitpicking activities on your web pages.
Bob Canada: Sorry I haven't written for so long. Been really busy working on a cel animation demo reel at work. Allow me to join the legions who've expressed shock and dismay at your publisher's actions. I've enjoyed all the Guides immensely, and it was fun to find out I wasn't the only one who noticed all was not quite right in the Trek--and X-Files--universes. Nitpicking allows me to see mistakes and implauabilities and yet still be able to enjoy a show. I'm hopeful that the publishing climate will change, but if not, it was a fun ride while it lasted.
VJ Boyd: Oh my that's horrible! I am disapointed you will not be able to put out another DS9 nitpicker book, I was looking forward to that. You still get royalties on the existing books, don't you?
Phil: Some. (Although, with the decline of Trek in recent years it's been less!) As for the rest of the comments, thanks again for the kind words!
Klingon "Houses" and The House of John The Shrubber
Beginning with Mark Schieber's comments in the 6/5/98 column
Jeff Flowers: I've wondered about the current status of Worf's honor for a while myself. I've came to remember that at the beginning to the second part of "The Way of the Warrior", Worf and Gowron argue about Worf joining him, Gowron threatens to remove Kurn's spot on the High Council, seize The House of Mogh's land,and make Worf an outcast in Klingon society.Worf responds,"But I'll still have my honor". I always took that to mean by whatever system Klingons measure honor, Worf still had his because he didn't turn his back on his committment to the Federation, but he just wasn't the most popular person in the Empire. If he didn't have honor, he couldn't join the House of Martok because they would lose their honor as well. Worf's getting a raw deal from Gowrow, but he does have honor as Klingons define it.
Clay: Gowron gave him his honor back before he became his enemy. How can he take his honor from him. I thought a Klingon could only dishonor himself. A discommendation is different I thought than being dishonored but maybe not. Isn't it possible that he still has his honor since Gowron gave it to him even if they are enemies…...Lursa and B'etor's army and Gowron's army were enemies but they still partied together and had their honor.
Klingons Have Ridges (At Least They Do Now)
Beginning with Mark Schieber's comments in the 6/12/98 column
Scott Neugroschl:Mark Scheiber says that the Excalbians picked up on the "subterfuge" of the smooth headed Klingons. It would be more logical to assume that the Excalbians used Kirk's mental image of Kahless to create the false Kahless.
Omer Belsky: First, about the Klingon's heads... I recently heard what might be the best theory of all : doors just got shorter and shorter with time !
Tim MacPherson: With regards to the Klingons have Ridges thread... While the theories of viruses are interesting (the horseshoe crab one was... different), the more likely theory would seem to be more like the gentically-altered-to-look-like-humans ones. Recall in the TNG episode "Genesis" when the crew de-evolved, Worf became a hulking beast covered in boney ridges (not the we ever got a real good look at him), and they said he was de-evolving into an earlier form of Klingon. I find it unlikely that evolution would remove all those ridges, then start to put them back.
Tom Elmore: As I recall, in the late 1980's when the movies were in vouge, this was a hot topic of discussion. DC comics, which at the time had the comic book rights to Star trek, offered a "seperate race" theory as to why some Klingons have ridges, and others don't. This view was also dopted and expanded by several unoffical books and magazines, though occassionally you did run into the argument that the Klingons had had their ridges surgically removed (a theory that was further accepted after some TOS Klingons appeared on DS9 with ridges.)
However, the unltimate arbitrator on such matters is and always has been Gene Roddenberry, who was cited in the December 1988 issue of Starlog Magazine that the ridges had always been there. It was due to faulty 20th century television transmissions that we could not see them. Thus there is no debate! They have always been there and it is the fault of NBC that we have this ongoing controversy!
The Death Of Jadzia
Beginning with Matt Greer's comments in the 6/12/98 column
Charles Cabe: I liked the way they wrote Dax out of the show. 1. This allows Dax's eight (ninth) host to return later on. 2. In the anti-time future in "All Good Things..." Troi died around the 7th season of DS9. But, they don't say how; Just that Adm. Riker blames Gov. Worf. So it's possible that Troi died in the same manner.
Sarah Perkins: I am going to really, really miss Jadzia Dax. She's not my absolute favorite character (that would be Sisko or Bashir), but she made me fond of her and it was always sort of mentally refreshing to watch someone with such a tongue-in-cheek sense of humor and yet so completely sincere. Her death will leave a huge gap on the station; she was Sisko's best friend, Worf's wife, she and Kira were what I have heard termed a 'battle-ready sisterhood', she was the science officer on the frontier, and the light of Bashir's life. I enjoyed the way she was matched with Worf this season; they made a great couple. I wish I could have seen a Klingon-Trill child!
I thought the creators might have learned something about the proper way to kill off a respected character after the response Tasha Yar's death in "Skin of Evil" must have caused. Kes was allowed to live and to leave a gift behind her when she left Voyager. Now I wonder. Having Jadzia killed by a pa-wraith was almost as bad as Yar's death by Armus. Though not quite. One point I liked in this episode was when the wraith left Dukat and he lifted Jadzia's head and apologized to her("small comfort, but I never meant to harm you..."). But they made her a victim, and that annoys me. I would have preferred that she die in pitched battle; Jadzia was a brave warrior.
Phil, do you know where I could reach Terry Farrel with a letter or e-mail? I want to wish her luck.
Actresses do have the right to chose their own path--they don't owe us anything. That's such a noble attitude! It just has one problem....
How much I'm going to miss her!
Phil: Sorry. Don't know how to get in touch with Terry Farrel via email!
Scott Newton: Does anyone else out there feel that the deaths of main characters from the TNG era forward have been really really unsatisfying? First, Tasha Yar was tossed aside in a random act of violence. Sarek's passing was delivered via messenger ("By the way, he's dead.") Then, Kirk fell down a cliff as a bridge fell on him. Now, Dax just happened to get in Dukat's way. Compare these to the profanely heroic way Spock gave his life in ST 2. I know that Starfleet is a dangerous career, that random violence does happen, and that heroic deaths may not always be realistic. But don't you think our main characters deserve better?
Defibrillator Energy Output
Beginning with Steve Braun's comments in the 6/12/98 column
Phil: I looked but I couldn't come up with this answer! Sorry about that.
David Duchovny's Other Acting Gigs
Beginning with Stephen Mendenhall's comments in the 6/19/98 Column
Joe Griffin: David Duchovny was also in a really awful 1989 independent film called "New Year's Day." It was directed, written and acted in by Henry Jaglom (hint: unless you're Woody Allen, and these days even if you are, don't try to do triple duty on a film. The resulting movie [is terrible].)
Lisa Shock: David has been the host of a sexy late-night show on Showtime called Red Shoes Diaries, for several years. In early seasons lots of famous people did episodes - including Denise Crosby. BE WARNED, this is a show about the sexual adventures of a variety of women. In the spirit of many late night cable shows, the show features nudity and explicit sex scenes. I'm always amazed that no one seems to know about David's other regular show!
Phil: Perhaps we're trying to forget that it exists!
The Computer Chronicles
Beginning with Matthew Patterson's comments in the 6/19/98 Column
Michael Ash: I read your Ask the Chief column every week, and came across your complaints about computer trouble. I have one suggestion that no one else is saying. It may not be totally practical for your situation, but I just *have* to bring it up.
Get a Mac. I recall reading that you once had one, but gave it up. Come back. There are, of course, problems with this. The foremost being that this suggestion is just a little too late; you have already purchased your PC, but I'm going to go through the spiel anyway, for no reason whatsoever. ;)
The main reason you wouldn't want a Mac, being a semi-starting programmer, you need the PC because it makes up 90% of the programming marketplace. However, a lot of the programming can be done equally well on both (such as Java, etc.) and there's always Virtual PC. Running Virtual PC, Real PC, or SoftWindows 95 will get you the performance of a 200 (or so) mhz Pentium while running on a top-of-the-line Power Macintosh G3, and VPC et. al. run much, much better than an actual PC.
So, run what you can on the Mac, at twice the speed you're getting out of your PC (but less money for the machine), run what you can't under emulation (slower, yes, but how much does that really matter for that kind of thing?) and crash much, much less often. I am not kidding here: I own a PowerCenter Pro 180 (a Mac clone from a now-defunct company) and it's a bad week when it crashes more than twice. I kid you not. And I am NOT the sort of person to baby my computer; I program, I play games, I run 15 programs at once so I can browse the internet, read news, chat, check e-mail, write a letter, and program all at the same time. No problem.
Anyway, since this option is less than practical, I shall add another one: Linux. I run MkLinux on my computer side-by-side with MacOS, and it's even MORE stable. It's something of a bear to set up, but it never crashes. Ever. I've been running it for about two weeks now and I have not once seen the entire system come down. Linux originated on the PC, and the PC variants should be even more stable and mature than the Mac versions.
Anyhow, good luck. If you need, I can send you an image of Saint Dogbert, the patron saint of technology in order to ward off the demons of stupidity. It helps. ;)
Phil: Frankly, I would love to run a Mac. I did my writing on an old Mac II and in the last year, it's crashed . . . maybe . . . twice?! Unfortunately, it's just not practical to develop software when you don't test it on a native box. Emulators might be good but they aren't the real thing. And it's even worse in a case where the emulator might be more stable than the real thing.
Al East: Welcome to the wonderful world of Windows 95. Microsoft's very successful attempt to drive the whole planet over the brink ;-)
My career for the past 15 years has been computer maintenance for the USAF and your symptoms, especially the fact that disabling the video cache seemed to help, lead me to believe your problem is either with the video memory (either on the video card are on the motherboard) or possible the processor itself.
Most of the newer machines that run faster than 266 MHz use a 100 MHz bus speed instead of the 66 MHz used by slower machines. The faster bus speed can cause the sort of problem you're having because not all memory chips are properly tested to verify they can actually run at the faster 100 MHz speed, its not a common speed yet. The fact that disabling your cache helped means it's possible you're having this type of problem. You might want to verify what bus speed your system is using and, if possible, set it back to 66 MHz and see if that helps.
Unfortunately there's also another possibility, the processor itself. Sad to say, there are some unsavory characters out there selling 266 MHz processors relabled and overclocked as 300 MHz or 333 Mhz (the 266 MHz chip is lots cheaper so they make a large profit off this). The chip can run at this speed, but not reliably, and eventually it burns out. Here's a copy of an email that covers this problem.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 23:10:38 -0400
From: "Kriston J. Rehberg"
Subject: Forgery when buying Pentium 2 computers -- failure is often only sign
Hi, here's a message I sent to my friends after I bought a forged Pentium 2 machine.
If you're thinking of buying or have bought a Pentium 2 computer recently, I hope this message will save you some grief with forged clock speeds and disreputable dealers. Perhaps those store-brand computers should not be as fast as their labels state.
I recently purchased two Pentium 2 MMX-based computers from a very large, local computer department store (in VA). One of them was sold as a P2 300 MHz with ECC Cache, the other a P2 266 MHz with identical features. In reality, after close inspection of the chip and the output of a diagnostics program on the 300 MHz model, I found that computer to contain forged components. I found evidence that the original serial number had been rubbed off the CPU module. Around the "new" serial number was evidence of tampering and the faint outline of what looked like the old serial number. The typeface didn't even match the old serial number and the new number was easy to wipe off. The final proof was the indisputable fact that this Pentium chip did not feature an "ECC Cache". According to Intel's documentation, *all* 300 MHz Pentium 2 chips must have this feature. The faked serial number had "EC" which indicates that the chip must have this feature. However, diagnostics proved that the ECC Cache feature was definitely not present on this chip. Therefore, the processor speed and serial number turned out to be forged and what I had purchased instead was most likely an overclocked P266 or P233 processor in a motherboard jumpered to run it at 300 MHz. Intel explains that as an artifact of their manufacturing process, there is nothing inside any Intel processor that can be used to identify its proper clock speed. The only evidence would be unexplained, intermittent failures, or accidental discoveries such as mine. So much for quality control from the world's largest CPU manufacturer.
When I went back to the large computer department store to return the two computers, they did eventually return my money with no restocking charge. The service department claimed to never have heard of this problem, but offered to replace the CPU on a repair call. They could give me no assurance that I could get a non-forged CPU. I offered that they replace it with a retail-packaged Pentium from the do-it-yourself department, but he declined. So, he lost a big sale of two top-of-the-line computers and the business of a frequent, regular customer. However, I went to the sales floor to discuss this with the salesman who sold me the two computers and he readily admitted that P333's and P300's are nothing more than overclocked P266's or P233's and didn't see a problem with the relabeled processor module. He then tried to sell me a 333 MHz system! I'm not making this up! I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. So, be careful out there.
There was some news about forged Pentium 2 processors and how to identify them at http://www.news.com this past week.
Nitty-gritty details: There is no way to identify a forged 266 or 233 MHz processor. The fact that you can identify most 300 MHz P2's is an accident because Intel decided to make all 300 MHz chips and higher contain the ECC feature. The price difference between non-ECC 266 MHz P2's and ECC 300 MHz CPU's is about $160, which is a lucrative temptation (by comparison, ECC 266 MHz P2's are only $100 away from ECC 300 MHz P2's, making it hardly worth the labor cost for the forgeries). Note that there is also no way to identify a forged 330 MHz or 350 MHz P2 processor. It makes me wonder who the processor manufacturer cares more about protecting -- the customers, the resellers, or the manufacturers themselves. In any case, the safest way to purchase Pentium 2 CPU's is directly from Intel in the "retail" package. These CPU's are typically $20-$30 more and are sealed in the box and come with a three-year warranty direct from Intel. That warranty is much longer than the forged chips will actually last, so Intel is actually giving you a good deal. Non-retail, or "OEM" chips are sold in bulk through resellers and are only warranted with the system, but the rub is that the processor is likely to burn out from heat damage shortly after the warranty has expired on the system.
Caveat emptor,
Kris Rehberg
PS...These forgeries are very rarely done with the knowledge of the store. It's usually one of the resellers of the CPU's that do it. Some even pry open the module and replace a fast CPU board with a much slower CPU, believe it or not.
------------------------------
Phil, I sincerely hope you didn't get burned by this scam, but you might want to have your P2 processor board checked to verify its the real deal.
Al East: It took me a bit of looking around but I was able to find you a link to a program I'd remembered reading about that is suppose to test for the forged Pentium II chip. You can find it at http://www.heise.de/ct/p2info/
You can also find info on how to read the label on the P2 processor board at the Intel support site.
Phil: I shall check it out!
Bob Canada: I feel your pain regarding your switch to a pc. I'm the only person here at work who uses a mac. Soon I'm going to have to start learning a software package that only runs on pcs, so my mac days are numbered too. I can do anything on my mac, but the minute I get on a pc, I feel like I'm trying to peer out through a dense fog. Most of the software isn't that different, but when I have to get out of it and into the system...oy.
More Discussion About the Holodeck
Beginning with Edward Jefferson's comments in the 6/26/98 Column
Clay: The reason the Doc's way of being is so much simpler than a holodeck is that he is not an entire simulation like you would have in a holodeck. He is just one character. He only needs certain things that the holoemitters do. The holodeck creates environments in their entirety. Holoemitters alone are not sufficient to do this, at least not the kind that the Doc uses. The holodeck is used for much more than creating characters like I said. It creates everything you see, hear, smell, taste, or touch.
Phil: Well, we can certain guess all we want on how the holodeck works but it's really up to the creators to be consistent in their explanations and . . . surprise . . . they aren't!
Transwarp's Failings
Beginning with Kevin Weiler's comments in the 6/26/98 Column
Matthias Roth: Here is a possible solution (not for the general issue of the nature of transwarp): The usual dilithium crystals melt at the very high warp frequencies needed for transwarp. You need a special kind of dilithium (found by Voyager) to get past warp 10. The Excelsior crew was for sure very surprised on their first real transwarp flight :-)
The Bad Guys
Beginning with Corey Hines's comments in the ac980619.htm6/26/98 Column
John Myers: Bear in mind when listing all the alien races and saying that the Federation has been at war with them all (and so the Federation must therefore pick fights) that you are actually listing the independent alien races. These people are by definition those whose cultures and attitudes are sufficiently incompatible with the Federation that the Federation have not managed to persuade them to become members (or allies) of the Federation.
Multiculturalism in Trek
Beginning with Brian's comments in the ac980619.htm6/26/98 Column
Omer Belsky: About multi-culturisem - i must argue that it is not so. Star Trek has a very untolorable approach to any one with values diffrent then their own. To put simply, the Federation - a representation of American and Modern humanistical ideas is potrayed as perfect, while all other cultures are potrayed as in perfect, and often corrupt and evil. Just remember that the old TREK Klingons were representations of the Soviets. Star Trek is only supportive of cultures which have similar ideologies.
Phil: You're right! As with most things Trek, the creators are very inconsistent in this area. In fact, I had the opportunity to review a pre-release copy of a wonderful book several weeks ago called (if I remember correctly) The Double Vision of Star Trek. It's a fairly comprehensive examination of the espoused philosophies of Trek and the inability of the creators to adhere to them. It was really good! (It's was scheduled to be published by Cornerstone Press Chicago and I'm hoping that they go through with it because it's a book that a lot of nitpickers would enjoy. Unfortunately, with the current climate in the unauthorized market . . .)
On to the questions . . .
Omer Belsky: I was re-reading the Nitpicker's guide, and I came across your definition of Terrorisem. You said that Terrorisem was attacking civilian populations for moral implications. If that's true, then wouldn't the Hiroshima bomb be considered a terrorist attack?
Phil: First of all, let me reproduce the exact quote from the Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers, "Terrorism is the systematic targeting of nonmilitary targets for the sole purpose of evoking a negative emotional response in the populace. The purpose of terrorism is not military conquest. The purpose of terrorism is to devalue the commitment of a people toward their government's position. By this definition, planting a bomb on a commercial airliner is terrorism. Filling a truck full of explosives and running it into an American military installation in Beruit, however, it not. That is a military attack."
Now, we could spend pages and pages and pages discussing the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima and its moral and ethical ramifications. But there was a state of war between Japan and the United States at the time. The US was facing and invasion of the main islands of Japan that would have cost many, many lives. The purpose of the bomb was not to devalue the commitment of the people toward their government's position, the purpose of dropping the bomb was to shock the Japanese government into surrender. (As an interesting aside, terrorism only works in democracies.)
Christopher Querry: Do you have a master list of your personal favorite nits? I would be interested in anyones' list. My list only includes nits that I found without help.
10. Star Trek First Contact. Capt. Picard 'hears' the Borg, then 'hears' Data say "Captain." However, Data was not part of the Borg collective. How does Picard 'hear' him?
09. Back To The Future Part II. Two cops were in the process of picking up young Jennifer thinking that she was old Jennifer. Marty & Doc wonder how to stop them. Doc pointed out that if they say that they are time travelers, then they would be committed. Why not have Marty pretend to be his son again? Or, he could say that he is Marty Sr. with a good face-lift.
08. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Capt. Spock logically reasoned the existence of a Bird of Prey that could fire while cloaked, and the theory that the assassins of Chancellor Gorkon beamed from the Enterprise. Mr. Chekov asked if the assassins could have beamed from the cloaked ship. Spock stated that the assassins came from Enterprise either because someone on board fired the torpedoes, or altered the data bank. However, it does not logically follow that if the data bank altered was on the Enterprise, then the assassins must have beamed from the Enterprise. The assassins could have beamed from the Bird of Prey.
07. Quantum Leap "Mirror, Mirror". Sam saw Stoopa leap away. He later asked Al if he saw the same effect. Al stated that he returns to the chamber when Sam leaps. However, Al witnessed Oswald replace Sam at the end of "Lee Harvey Oswald."
06. Star Trek Generations Capt. Picard and Capt. Kirk exit from the Nexus in a second attempt to stop Soran. There should now be two Picards. The one who was there during the first attempt, and the other who returned with Kirk.
05. Jurassic Park. Before seeing the brontosaur, Dr. Sadler found a plant that should have been extinct. Hammon later explained how he cloned dinosaurs using blood found in mosquitoes, but he never said anything about cloning plants.
04. Back To The Future Part II. Marty Jr. passed young Jennifer in the house and said "hi mom" because he thought that she was old Jennifer. A bit later, Marty Sr. and Lorraine wonder where old Jennifer is. Marty Jr. is listening to this conversation while he is eating. Why doesn't he say that his mom is home? He thinks that he just saw her a few minutes ago.
03. Toy Story. Buzz froze when humans were near. However, he hadn't yet realize that he is a toy. If Buzz really thinks that he's a real person and not a toy, then why does he freeze around humans?
02. The Return of Jafar & Alladin and the King of Thieves. Genie was wearing wrist shackles. However, he was freed from the shackles at the end of Alladin.
01. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Dr. McCoy asked Capt. Spock what death was like. Spock replied that it would be impossible to discuss the subject without a common frame of reference. However, McCoy had died before in the episode "Shore Leave". McCoy did have a common frame of reference, and shouldn't even have had to ask what death was like.
Phil: Unfortunately, I am out of time this morning but I have listed a bunch of my favorties in the Guides.
Mark Schieber: Have you ever noticed (look who I'm asking) that in the scene between Guinan and Q in the TNG episode "Q Who", Guinan holds up her hands in a cat-like position to ward off Q? What was that all about?
Does this effectively negate all Q's powers? And if so, wouldn't that be a good thing to teach all the other staff?
From "Death Wish":
JANEWAY: You may call your first witness
Q: Well, I was trying to call Commander Riker but he keeps making the "Cat Hands"! Drat!
Phil: Yeah, that whole "cat-hand" thing of Guinan's disappeared--never to be heard of again!
Murray Leeder: I was in a used bookstore last night and I found a hardcover copy of the original NextGen Guide! I didn't realize there was such a thing... are there any hardcover editions of the other guides? It was just $7.50 and my guide was in fairly bad condition at home (comes with use), so I purchased it on the spot.
Phil: Ee-yup! Those are put out by the Science Fiction Book Club and hardback editions of the guides are available for NextGen, Classic, NextGen II and X-philes.
Corey Hines: In both Next Gen guides you mention Rodenberry's vision of a zipperless future. Where exactly is this stated? In an episode, in a book?
Phil: I believe it's in The Making of Star Trek by Stephen E. Whitfield.
Have a great weekend, everybody!
If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Ask the Chief" or "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 1998 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.