Why was there never a major Romulan character in a Star Trek TV show?

[nightwind1]

The awesome Andreas Katsulas played Commander Tomalak in four episodes. While not quite "regular", I would call that "recurring".

[The Overlord]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

No, but you said, "The only reoccurring Romulan characters were Commander Sela and Commander Tomalak" and that is not true.

But I said major reoccurring character, Kimara Cretak is not a major character, is she?

nightwind1 wrote:

---

The awesome Andreas Katsulas played Commander Tomalak in four episodes. While not quite "regular", I would call that "recurring".

I mentioned him, I don't think he was a major character compared Dukat or Quark or any of the other characters nor as developed. He had potential to be, but too few appearances. Again I am talking about major reoccurring characters, who had a lot of appearances and an affect on the overall show.

[The Wormhole]

Bry_Sinclair wrote:

---

As for T'Pol that was meant to be revealed in the series that never was, so not sure how 'canon' that makes it.

Since it was never revealed, it's not canon in anyway. Which is a shame because back in Enterprise's first season I insisted T'Pol was a Romulan and had a bunch of arbitrary and in some cases idiotic theories to back up the claim. I was laughed at and mocked down in the Enterprise forum, so it would have been nice to be vindicated. Ah well, it was eventually revealed that Vulcan's government was being manipulated by Romulans during Enterprise, that's vindication enough.

Sector 7 wrote:

---

An entire movie [arguably not a successful one] was devoted to Romulans in Nemesis.

Nemesis was more about Shinzon and the Remans. Romulans were only featured in it, the movie wasn't about them.

[Therin of Andor]

The Overlord wrote:

---

But I said major reoccurring character

Not in the sentence I was replying to.

[Temis the Vorta]

The Romulans were quite developed on the shows. We saw their culture, politics, homeworld, intrigue, spies and more.

That's all surface stuff compared with the development other major aliens got. I'd like to see someone finally dig down into the Romulans and tell us what's unique about them.

Vulcans are all about logic but that's just masking their violently emotional true selves; Klingons are warlike and natter on about honor (hypocritically in many cases); the Cardassians are "bad" but strangely likeable probably because of their unique combination of intelligence, charm and self-destructive egotistical delusion. The Founders are paranoid whackjobs who invented a society at war with itself (Vortas and Jem'hadar are deliberately designed to be at odds) because their goal above all is to ensure their minions never unite and rebel - a society that is both sick and functional.

The key to the Romulans is that they must have the same problem the Vulcans do. They are too violently emotional to have a coherent society unless they come up with some solution. They rejected the Vulcan solution of fetishizing logic - which I can sympathize with, if they rejected it for being hypocritical - so what's the alternative they've hit upon instead?

[T'Girl]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

I'd like to see someone finally dig down into the Romulans ...

Maybe Temis, there is a place in Star Trek for a mysterious enemy, who are largely a unknown quantity.

One of the complains you hear here concerning the Borg, is that we came to know them too well. They lost part of their scary factor.

If we learn too much about the Romulans, what will they lose?

[GNDN]

Well we did get to see Tomalak somewhat regularly, but his character was never too far developed (and came out downright manic in All Good Things) A mysterious enemy is great, and the glimpses we saw from the 2 major Romulan Commanders in TOS were wonderful, as was that provided by Alidar Jarok and the scheme in Data's Day. Wonderfully creepy and unsettling.

But overall, the more we found out about them, the more conventional they started to become. See Face of the Enemy. Another ship, another crew, another version of the Obsidian Order or Section 31. It is a tough line to walk between the implacable enemy of The Neutral Zone and the more commonplace political maneuvering seen in Unification. I've longed to see more done with the Romulans, but perhaps in many of these cases less was indeed more.

DS9 did have a wonderful opportunity with Sub Commander T'Rul to have that recurring character and give a better glimpse to the unique Romulan point of view, unfortunately the character was quickly dropped. Any bts info on if there was a larger plan for the character or why she was never seen again?

[The Overlord]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Maybe Temis, there is a place in Star Trek for a mysterious enemy, who are largely a unknown quantity.

One of the complains you hear here concerning the Borg, is that we came to know them too well. They lost part of their scary factor.

If we learn too much about the Romulans, what will they lose?

The Cardassians were further developed in DS9 and that was seen as a good thing.

The thing is the Borg were supposed to be scary bogey men, where knowing less about them would make them scarier. The Romulans are not nearly as scary as the Borg were when they started out, so making them more unknown doesn't make more scary like with the Borg, so perhaps developing them more is the way to go. The Romulans don't work as bogeymen the way the Borg do.

[tafkats]

It would have been cool to explore Romulan culture more, through the lens of a main or recurring character. But I don't think there was any particular reason it didn't happen -- it's just that there were only so many seasons and only so many hours, and that just didn't happen to be the direction anyone went.

[Temis the Vorta]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Maybe Temis, there is a place in Star Trek for a mysterious enemy, who are largely a unknown quantity.

That sort of thing is okay for a short period of time, then it gets dull. It's just a gimmick. The Romulans have been around for close to half a century. They're way past the time when they could rely on mystery alone for interest.

The Cardassians were further developed in DS9 and that was seen as a good thing.

Well developed characters are always preferable to gimmicks. Of course someone could come along and totally blow the Rommie's development, but I'm always in favor of the riskier option vs boring stagnation.

The thing is the Borg were supposed to be scary bogey men, where knowing less about them would make them scarier.

Knowing everything about the Borg isn't what destroyed them. They are implacable and unstoppable, and therefore a threat like no other - knowing that doesn't make them less fearsome.

What screwed them up was being overused, which required them to be beaten by Starfleet on a regular basis, and for assimilation to be reversed whenever it happened to an important character that couldn't be written out of the story. This made the Borg look like chumps. Since their un-chump-hood is their most salient feature - really, their only feature - this was a huge problem.

The solution there is for the writers to treat the Borg with respect. The Borg always beat Starfleet with very few exceptions, and only when Starfleet is being exceptionally clever (and therefore, the writers must earn this privilege by being exceptionally clever in what they have Starfleet do.)

I'd impose an ironclad No-Going-Back rule to assimilation. If Spock gets assimilated by the Borg, guess what, now he's a Borg. Forever. So don't play this card unless you're willing to live with the consequences forever.

Or, to summarize: don't be sloppy and cheap in how you write anything, but most especially, not the Borg.

[CaptainMatt]

I agree about the Borg issue, but have to say i have been enjoying the VOYager episodes all the same.
As for recurring Romulans, I always thought TNG would have made better use of Commander Sela. but then I was a huge Denise Crosby fan at the time.