The Trek BBS

The Trek BBS (
-   Voyager (
-   -   Seska's poor unamed lost baby (

teacake September 25 2012 02:53 PM

Seska's poor unamed lost baby
IF the Doctor had never told Seska that the baby was not Chakotay's then Cullah would have left that baby on Voyager alongside the body of his dead mother. All it took was for the Doctor to have decided to keep that information to himself for strategic reasons or for Seska to have not brought the baby in for a check up in the midst of her hostile boarding and acquisition of Voyager.

Such a small set of events.. without them they would have found the infant in Janeway's ready room. Would they have kept him because he was half Cardassian and so from their quadrant? Or would they have returned him to Cullah if possible?

Since Cullah agreed to have his lover impregnate herself with another man's child for the sake of luring Voyager into a trap I suspect Janeway would have declared him a hostile and unfit father and taken the baby with her. Naomi would have had someone to grow up with. Hopefully the Cardassian smarts would have been dominant.

Still, if the child IS of Cardassian level intelligence he has a great future as a leader of the Kazon.

R. Star September 25 2012 03:33 PM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
I dunno, I always thought that the Voyager writers were kinda lame for pushing the proverbial reset button even with the baby. Can't have a lasting plot effect with long term consequences after all. I almost wonder if the Doctor just told Seska that to screw with her head as a little payback.

I do wonder if Culluh would have bothered raising the child. Sure he took it with him, but I could easily see him growing angry at it as a reminder of his defeat and loss and end up sending it to those slave mines. Though yes, it's equally possible that Jal Cardassian grows up to amount to something.

Having another kid with Naomi might be interesting, but then again I guess pulling the quick growing up trick with two children would be a bit redundant. Besides, Voyager's future track record with certain Borg babies being known, the kid could be better off with Culluh.

Guy Gardener September 25 2012 05:57 PM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
Seska told Cullah that Chakoaty had raped her while she was still back on Voyager.

Cullah was fine with raising Chakotay's child.

teacake September 25 2012 11:25 PM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
Oh I forgot about the rape accusation.. Seska was pretty pissed off with the information though.

He may have been fine about her having Chak's child but it doesn't mean he would have raised Chak's child or taken him when Seska was dead. She would have sold him on how to use the development as a way to lure Voyager.

Guy Gardener September 25 2012 11:32 PM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
I just get the feeling that fidelity and consent are not a big part of Kazon sexual politics that, frankly when a girl says "this one is yours" the bloke shrugs his shoulders and says "Meh, it could be worse?"

teacake September 25 2012 11:37 PM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
Plus they are too stupid to do DNA tests.

Even if, presumably, Cullah has been told the baby is his his men will have known all this time that the baby is not Kazon. They've known that for months as a fact so Cullah's sudden announcement that a human hologram on the side of their prey has, in the midst of sabotaging their glorious agenda, announced that the baby is Cullah's will mean NOTHING. Why should they believe that? Cullah will be nagged by his grudging respect of Seska's intelligence to believe it if she did but that baby will go back Kazon society with a huge cloud of doubt hanging over its head.

Guy Gardener September 26 2012 01:05 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
Did the doctor lie to protect the baby?

besides, the Doctor only said that it was Kazon DNA, not specifically Cullahs.

Seska didn't sleep around because it was fun.

She slept around to control her pawns.

That lady had a lot of pawns.

teacake September 26 2012 01:51 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
I don't mean the baby will have a cloud hanging over its head as to whether it is Cullah's but whether it is Kazon at all.

Janeway was willing to go after this baby to save it when she thought it was Chak's but she's happy to never mention it again when she found out it was only Seska's.

Guy Gardener September 26 2012 02:02 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
If Cullah notices any cloud he'll begin a bloody purge, even if he has doubts himself.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

The Doctor showed Seska scans of the baby.

Did he fake the results before showing it to Seska or has she no aptitude for medicine?

teacake September 26 2012 02:06 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
I can't think of any reason for the Doctor to have lied. It seems like there is going to be a reason but they don't do anything with it so I think they had to have that scene so they could never talk about the baby again.

Why should Cullah bother with this child if he has any doubts? Why would he not have doubts, he's realized Seska was manipulative.

Really my point is there are a hundred ways this baby's life could be a crapfest aside from the assumed crapfest that is normal Kazon life. And Janeway did not care. Once it was no longer Chak's she lost all investment in its well being.

Guy Gardener September 26 2012 02:56 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
Because he loves Seka and this is all he has left of her.


Because he's loved this kid since it was inside her and being out side of her doesn't change his heart's momentum.

Remember My name is earl?

"I can't blame my son because his mother is a whore"

(that can't be the line from the pilot when Earl found a black child climbing out of his wife... but he stayed!)

Meanwhile the Doctor was lying his ass off as he was directing Suder to go out and kill people and sabotage shit while he was hiding kazon bodies in his stasis draws.

His lie mode was totally on.

Mr. Laser Beam September 26 2012 03:55 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby

Guy Gardener wrote: (Post 7014499)
Because he loves Seka and this is all he has left of her.


If you're talking about Culluh? I doubt it. Culluh, like all Kazon, doesn't love.

Look at how Kazon treat women. Little more than slaves. And that is basically how Culluh treated Seska. I dare you to look at any scenes with those two interacting, and then tell me that he actually loved her. :rolleyes:

It's just a good thing the child is male. Otherwise it would have no rights in Kazon society.

Guy Gardener September 26 2012 04:04 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby

(Madred has brought his daughter to work, and a pet in a cage. Picard is sitting slumped in the chair, wearing a loose tunic)
MADRED: I want you to be very careful with your wompat from now on, Jil Orra. Now that she's separated from her mother, she depends on you.
JIL ORRA: I will, father. Do humans have mothers and fathers?
MADRED: Yes, but human mothers and fathers don't love their children as we do. They're not the same as we are.
JIL ORRA: Will you read to me tonight?
MADRED: Yes, of course I will. I'll see you later.
Love is not one thing.

Mr. Laser Beam September 26 2012 04:07 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
^ The difference is, we know from experience that Madred was lying. All we know of the Kazon are what we saw on the show. And you can't show me even one scene where women were treated as anything other than dogshit in Kazon society.

teacake September 26 2012 04:09 AM

Re: Seska's poor unamed lost baby
SESKA: Hello, everyone. What do you think of your son, Chakotay? He has your eyes, don't you think? Thank goodness he doesn't look too human. You all have such weak foreheads.
CHAKOTAY: May he grow up never knowing the contempt his father has for his mother.
CULLUH: I think I can assure you of that, Commander. I intend to take him for my own son.

So there is that. Perhaps Kazon society has a tradition of taking on male children as a part of your "house".

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.