posted
Another take on the "Why, oh why couldn't the Klingons kill the main character of the show in the pilot episode?":
Remember that it was the Vulcans who filled our heads with prejudice about how the Klingons would react to the return of Klaag. I'm sure they had studied the writings of the Kahless mythology very closely, and read through all the Klingon laws and Warrior's Manners Manuals and whatnot. And I'm sure that those writings would have dictated that the Klingons in fact kill Archer where he stands.
But Vulcans are theoreticans. They have little appreciation of the erratic manner in which humans break their own written and unwritten rules when they feel it's the Right Thing to Do. I find it eminently plausible that the Klingons in fact share this habit with us humans. The Vulcans simply could not correctly predict how the Klingons would respond, even though they were convinced that they had the Klingon culture down pat.
As for why Picard would say the first contact was disastrous, heck, it did begin with a crash, aka disaster.
"Actually, he rather provided a logical argument about why this isn't the case."
I didn't see any. All I saw was an assertion that, if the Klingons were angry enough to make war, they would have done it immediately. But that has nothing to do w/ anything. The Klingons aren't mad enough to start a war. But they do dislike humans now. Even if they don't have a reason to go to war at the moment, they'll be more prone to do so in the future.
The fighting isn't over the events of BB. But, if not for the events of BB, the Klingons wouldn't be hostile toward humans, and wouldn't go to war over other matters later.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm not saying that the Klingons aren't hostile. But I am saying that they aren't hostile enough.
If the first contact was going to result in "decades of warfare," one should expect something a that's at least "disastrous."
I would hardly call the Klingon first contact a disaster. Sure, it was a messy mission, but Archer was quite successful in returning Klaang to the Klingon Empire and providing crucial information to the High Council. His mission was accomplished, and he left Qo'noS peacefully.
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: You forget, of course, of an old Klingon proverb. "Revenge is a dish best served cold." They've got a potentially dangerous enemy -- would it not make more sense to learn as much as possible about this new threat before striking a death blow? Klingons aren't stupid.
That doesn't mean they can't start with killing the puny Human who insulted their honor or violated their customs or whatever.
Klingons aren't subtle. They certainly can carry a grudge, but they don't delay vengeance.
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: Then for whatever reason, Picard lied or mangled the actuality of the events.
Oh, wonderful, now we're accusing one of the Federation's model captains and diplomats of lying to a planetary executive during First Contact negotiations...
quote:Originally posted by TSN: I didn't see any. All I saw was an assertion that, if the Klingons were angry enough to make war, they would have done it immediately. But that has nothing to do w/ anything. The Klingons aren't mad enough to start a war. But they do dislike humans now. Even if they don't have a reason to go to war at the moment, they'll be more prone to do so in the future.
Gee, you're not even meeting my argument head-on, you're just dismissing it by saying that there's no evidence. Of course there's no evidence! This is all a matter of interpretation of events based on what we know of established Trek history.
By your own statement quoted above, the first contact seen in "Broken Bow" didn't lead to war, but only established unfriendly relations. Therefore, the first contact incident did not cause the war.
� NO disaster at first contact � NO war between Earth and Qo'noS
Here's another aspect of the quote from Picard that no one's looked at:
quote:"It was decided then that we must do surveillance before making contact."
I see absolutely no Prime Directive issues that could be relevant to the first contact as presented in "Broken Bow." And there's no reason that surveillance would have helped the situation; Archer and the admirals already had the information they needed from the Vulcans! It's apparent that the Klingon encounter had no effect on contact protocols later on. As far as Archer's concerned, everything went just fine. (Relating to meeting the Klingons, anyway.)
Look beyond the facts presented. Speaking as a history student who's used to looking at causes and effects, I do not see the events producing the result that we're supposed to get.
Of course, I prefer to think of ENT as existing in an alternate timeline...
[ December 14, 2001: Message edited by: MinutiaeMan ]
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Who says "then" means the time of BB? I would think that "then" would refer to the decades of war. After SF realized what sort of problems were being caused by that first contact years later, then they changed the rules.
And much as I hate to beat this Hitler analogy into the ground, it's a good one, so I'll use it again. Klingon first contact == Hitler's rise to power. In 1933, no-one could tell we were going to go to war w/ Germany. In 2151, no-one can tell the humans are going to go to war w/ the Klingons. So some event in the future will actually start the war, equivalent to the invasion of Poland in 1939. Hitler's rise to power wasn't the beginning of WW2. First contact w/ the Klingons wasn't the beginning of decades of war. But, if Hitler had never risen to power, WW2 wouldn't have happened. And, if Archer hadn't fucked up first contact w/ the Klingons, there wouldn't have been decades of war.
Not to mention that you're placing way too much importance on Picard's exact words. You assume that, because he said "disastrous", that the first contact itself must have been some sort of battle or other such immediately recognizeable fiasco. But something that doesn't look like a disaster right away can certainly seem like one two centuries later. Especially if Picard wasn't wholly versed in the specifics of the event. Maybe all he knew was that Klingon first contact didn't go completely smoothly, and, if it had, humans and Klingons wouldn't have fought for so long. So he just threw the word "disastrous" in to make his speech sound better.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
� Picard's words. Well, if you want to twist his meaning into whatever you like, then this conversation is pointless. By your argument, Picard's definition of "disaster" could mean that some Human insulted the Klingon representative by asking, "Dude, what's wrong with your forehead?"
� The first contact. Let me go into greater detail, then. The encounter between Humans/the Fed has to lead to something. Yet the "Broken Bow" incident is effectively resolved at the end of the episode. There's no long-term relationship established between Earth and Qo'noS. There's no war declared. There's no insults, as far as we can tell. Archer just delivers Klaang and leaves. Case closed.
Or are the Klingons going to just decide a few years later, "I didn't like the way that wuss Archer looked at me. Let's go beat the crap out of their planet"?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Yet the "Broken Bow" incident is effectively resolved at the end of the episode. There's no long-term relationship established between Earth and Qo'noS.
Right. And when Gowron suceeded K'mpec as High Council leader and Worf killed Duras, the TNG Klingon arc was effectively resolved. There would be no more interaction between our valiant crews and Qo'noS again.
[ December 14, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"Archer just delivers Klaang and leaves. Case closed."
Erm... How about the really nasty angry thing the Chancellor(?) said to Archer that Sato refused to translate? You think he was saying "thank you, please come again"?
And if I can't interpret Picard's words, why can you? You're assuming that, just because Picard said the word "disastrous", the incident must have been a huge fiasco. "Disastrous" can mean a lot of different things to different people.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
quote:Because of what Archer did, the Klingons don't like humans. If the Klingons liked humans, there would be no war later. But there is. And it happened because of that enmity which was started during Archer's first contact.
Which is just bad drama. It's like Voyager appearing out of the sphere at the end of Endgame. Its ambigous and frustrating. It does nothing but detract from the story.
And really, do you think if what the Klingon said was something along the lines of "We declare war upon you! We shall wipe out your entire species and be at your homeworld's step within the week! Prepare yourselves for battle!" that Hoshi would've declined to translate? No, he probably just called them a bunch of Denebian Slime Devils and told them to get the hell of his property before he called the cops.
Sure, it may or may not fit Picard's speech, but regardless it is just really bad writing.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Exactly. He probably said something like "fuck off, and don't show your pasty human faces on my planet again". And, later, someone showed their pasty human face on Qo'noS and a war started. Or something.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
