These things lead me to believe he is: - His makeup, such as it is, doesn't have much Klingonness to it (AFAIK, this is partly at Christopher Plummer's own request)...you can barely see his forehead ridge - He is more sneaky and underhanded than most Klingons, who would surely consider his actions in the film to be dishonorable (if a Klingon wanted to kill the Chancellor, they'd walk up to him and make an open challenge). Is it in the Klingon nature to conspire?
Don't know about the first, but as to the second: there have been plenty of examples of both crested and non-created Klingons behaving an underhanded manner, so one couldn't identify some kind of link between biology and behaviour like that--even if there was such a thing as Klingon 'nature', which there isn't. They may be genetically prone towards aggression, but any complex behaviour like conspiracy is culturally learned. Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
There seem to be TOS Klingons, QuchHa', and TNG Klingons, turtleheads. The Motion Picture and other TOS movies had 'reduced ridges' Klingons. They are usually talked about as turtleheads, but they don't have the distinctive ridges or the hair of Worf-era Klingons. FASA had the lovely four different types of Fusions, an idea that ENT tossed out. Then there's the Kumburan and Rumaiy, Kamorh'dag and Gevish'rae. I'm so over the whole forehead thing.
I think Chang is indeed a QuchHa' (i.e. a TOS Klingon). Both in appearance - if Chang had hair, he would look exactly like most Klingons did in TOS - and in attitude/behavior.
I never really thought about it before, but I have to go with Babaganoosh here and say he is a QuchHa' for the reasons he mentioned.
As was said, linking conduct to how one's forehead is configured is a bit simplistic. There are plenty of onscreen examples of ridgies acting in dishonorable fashion, and smoothies conducting themselves with what most Klingons would consider "honor." Kor and Kang, from TOS, for example. Man, somebody should write a book about this sort of thing....
Surely someone in the know around here can name at least one title from the vast Pocket catalog of Star Trek novels that deals at least to some extent with the subject of Klingon honor, while touching on the differences in appearance? Just spitballing here....
I don't think there's as much difference between the flat- and bone-heads as is often assumed. (an aside: given the variation in crests, my guess is that it's probably something like cartilage, rather than bone) . Personally, I think a lot of "Klingon Honor" lore is just cultural huffing and puffing, and to a certain extent, is the Klingon's "opiate of the masses". Worf, growing up separated from actual Klingon society, became something of a fundamentalist (and even within it, his family had high status and were part of the top nobility). For a poor kid like Martok, it was perhaps the one thing that he and he alone could control. Others had room to be more agnostic or apostate on the matter. Duras (and relations), K'mpec, Gowron, other council member? They might keep up the appearances of honor, but they were perfectly capable of compromising honor for politics or even personal gain. If there's anything Klingons value more than honor, it's success. In an Empire full of ambitious men vying for power, position, and prestige, it shouldn't be a surprise that ideas of what constitutes honor and where and to whom it applies can differ widely.
No, it is a Worf comment--but he made it about other Klingons who were fighting in an underhanded manner, so I thought it might be taken to suggest that there are a fair number of Klingon warriors who don't have trouble rectifying such actions with what seem to be the prevailing cultural beliefs re: soldiering and whatnot.
He conspired to falsely accuse a man of treason, simultaneously besmirching, Klingon society being what is it, the reputation of his son, likewise guiltless, as a political expediency to prevent the true but influencial culprit from becoming known. Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
What happened to Worf was unfortunate, yes. But K'mpec was acting for the well being of the *Empire*. Isn't that honorable? It would have been the height of dishonor to allow the Empire to be destroyed simply to save one man's reputation. K'mpec said as much.
Well, that's the problem I mentioned in my review for Burning House: Klingon honour has been so ill defined that is becomes a kind of catch-all, where 'our' conventional values are simply re-inscribed with a different lexicon and a somewhat macho penchant; our heroes are always honourable, whether it's lying about treason or a Ferengi telling off loitering warriors, and the bad guys are always dishounorable. Now, naturally, no culture is monolithic, so we can expect a prized concept like honour to have many different meanings to those in different position, and the honour or dishonour of an act debated, much as contemporary segments of society have wildly divergeant ideas of what it is to be pious or patriotic. But from where I stand, there was little honour to be found in K'mpec's position; it was one of pure pragmatism, deceitful if not outright criminal, and quite opposed to taking a principled stand. Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Would anyone mind putting of examples of the four types of Klingons mentioned above? I can think of the ones with ridges and the ones without, but I'm blanking on anything in between?
We saw many types: Kor was greenish brown Koloth had a caucasian complexion Kang had reddish brown skin TMP's Klingons had an extension of the spinal cord stretching up over their heads. ST III's Klingons all had totally different sets of forehead bumps and ridges Worf, his brother, and Alexander had foreheads that matched - suggesting that traits were passed through family lines. ST V's ridges were thin, tightly knotted central ridges... And so on.