Q Loves Picard?

[Whoa Nellie]

iguana_torrone wrote:

---

And you think that because...?

If you watch the end of the episode, Picard himself is unsure if it was Q or some sort of dream like near-death experience.

Warmest Wishes,
Whoa Nellie

[iguana_tonante]

I agree, I was just curious to learn why he "assumed" it was a fevered dream. I thought it might be something more than that.

[CoveTom]

An interesting possibility. If it was a dream of some sort, then Picard's subconscious took the opportunity to teach his conscious mind something it was not aware of. Because Picard himself admits that up until that point, he regretted much of his past and would have wanted to "undo" it. Only through the experiences he underwent in that episode did he come to realize how important those events were in shaping the man he became.

[Shon T'Hara]

iguana_torrone wrote:

---

And you think that because...?

1) The episode doesn't contain "Q" in the title.

2) No one but Picard saw Q.

3) I don't recall Q ever mentioning the events of the episode in his later appearances.

[Too Much Fun]

But Picard doesn't actually like Q. Why would Picard dream about Q being his guide somewhere between life and the afterlife? Q always comes to Picard, he is never sought by Picard consciously or unconsciously. Frankly, I think the idea that this whole episode (aside from the scenes in sick bay) was a fantasy/hallucination/dream is ludicrous.

[Christopher]

Shon T'Hara wrote:

---

1) The episode doesn't contain "Q" in the title.

Neither did "Encounter at Farpoint," "All Good Things...," or "Death Wish." Only 2/3 of the episodes featuring Q had "Q" in the title.

2) No one but Picard saw Q.

The same goes for "All Good Things...".

3) I don't recall Q ever mentioning the events of the episode in his later appearances.

The same goes for "True Q" and "All Good Things...".

The most you can legitimately say about "Tapestry" from these points is that it might not have really happened. It can't be conclusively proven that it did, but neither can it be conclusively proven that it didn't. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Whoa Nellie]

Too Much Fun wrote:

---

But Picard doesn't actually like Q. Why would Picard dream about Q being his guide somewhere between life and the afterlife?

Picard mentions that there were untidy parts of him he wished he could remove. Q simply may have been the most logical and/or immediate paradigm his mind could generate to explore those regrets.

Christopher wrote:

---

The most you can legitimately say about "Tapestry" from these points is that it might not have really happened. It can't be conclusively proven that it did, but neither can it be conclusively proven that it didn't. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The old you can't prove a negative. Picard is uncertain as to whether or not it was truly Q and the audience is left uncertain. This ambiguity is one of the things that makes this episode so wonderful. The other thing I love about this episode is that like the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" did with Kirk's character, "Tapestry" does a beautiful job of showing that it takes both the erudite and well as the "Hell bent for leather" ensign who was stabbed through the heart in a barroom brawl facets to make Picard the flagship captain.

Warmest Wishes,
Whoa Nellie

[siskokid888]

Christopher wrote:

---

But how do you define sentience? Modern cognitive science is increasingly demonstrating that sentience is a continuum, that many animals show a greater degree of self-awareness and cognitive complexity than we have recognized or been willing to admit. There's abundant evidence to demonstrate that great apes, dolphins, and maybe elephants are intelligent, self-aware beings, and yet our society still keeps them in zoos or circuses, and some keep baby chimps as pets. So even within our species, there's no consensus on what actually constitutes a level of sapience worthy of personhood. To a Q, humanity's ability to write books and build starships may be no more impressive than a chimp's ability to learn sign language or fish for termites with a stick is to the many humans who are aware of such skills but still dismiss the notion that anything nonhuman could be truly sapient.

My memory may be faulty (and usually is), but I thought I recalled Q refering to humans as some kind of single celled life form in comparison to himself. Can't remember what ep, but if he did say it, it would give creedence to the "pet" theroy.

[the G-man]

iguana_torrone wrote:

---

Does Q love Picard? Yes, like a human could love a cat, or probably more accurataly, a pet amoeba. Still, it's love nonetheless.

In fact, it's clear to me that, beyond all the mocking and putting down, Q likes humans, and feels some kind of connection with them, and especially with Picard (who's the perfect "straight man" for his antics). ....

As for Q being a villain, I don't think he's ever been portrayed as such... He puts obstacles in the way of our crew with the explicit purpose of having them overtaken by them. It's his way (cruel but effective) to teach humanity a lesson ...

Yes to all of this.

[Neutral Zone]

Don't know if Q love Picard, but more that he had weakness for the crew of the Enterprise and mankind. He treated them like a favourite toy that he would throw about when he was bored.

[LaBarre]

Of course Q loved Picard - in a Q sorta way.

Who doesn't?