View Single Post
Old September 23 2008, 06:43 PM   #40
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Picard's 'middle' years

(And Prince Charles? I've never heard that proposed as a name for a prior command of Picard's. What's that from?)
Oh, out of thin air. That is, from my head. And Pathfinder probably is but an extended typo, a brief lapse in Diane Duane's writing process for Intellivore.

"Hatemonger?" That's a little strong.
However, it is a uniquely negative statement coming from Picard. Typically, it would be Riker's role to condemn the Ferengi or the Talarians, or Worf's role to remind us that the only good Romulan is a dead one, and Picard's role to let such racist statements pass without dignifying them with a response, or even throw a disapproving glance at his colleagues.

Yes, Picard's voice and demeanor indicate some sort of amusement rather than anger. And he wouldn't speak like that of the Borg. But he would not speak like that of the Ferengi, either.

There's no evidence that Picard had any major involvement in the Cardassian wars. If he had, it would've presumably come up in "Chain of Command."
Fair enough. Then again, his stellar record with thwarting Romulan plots didn't come up in Nemesis... Although to TNG fans, it was more or less implicit there, in the decision to send him in ("closest ship", my ass!").

And early TNG made a point of portraying Picard as an explorer first and foremost, a man who used force only with great reluctance and regret. They were going for Jacques Cousteau, not Charles De Gaulle. I can't buy the idea that he was a veteran of a major war.
I'm not sure the two portrayals would be exclusive. We know little of Picard's past nature, save for the implication that he was something of a hellraiser originally. Perhaps he only started mellowing after seeing too much blood of all possible colors?

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote