Reunion...and repercussions

[EnriqueH]

Worf is a character rife with contradictions, the contradictions in his personality are pointed out often, especially by Troi. To accept Worf as a compelling character is to accept these contradictions as part of the narrative. He's not a real person. I think you are supposed to be disappointed with his decision to send Alexander away.

...persona: brave, honorable, dutiful.

Pretty one-dimensional, and not very interesting.

The fact that you are disappointed in the character and not the writers indicates that this was an effective plot point.

It's an interesting way to go for sure: Worf the honorable and brave Klingon sends his son away "to have a good home". However, it raises questions that this episode does not address. Is this the right thing for Alexander? For a show that prides itself on human issues, I'm disappointed the episode does not take this further. Worf does not want the responsibility of fatherhood and that, to me, is a contradiction. But it is one the episode does not address effectively.

]

Except that there was a plot point and reason. Worf felt that he was unable to provide a decent life for Alexander on the Enterprise. He had no experience being a parent and had only just shortly prior had discovered he was a parent to begin with.

Talk about shortsighted. So you're saying Worf's lack of experience being a parent is justification for effectively abandoning him to his grandparents? So does that mean all first time parents should simply have their first born live with their grandparents full time? Interesting.

Your assertion that Worf "punked out" is wrongheaded and shortsighted. Are you sure you're not just imposing what YOU would do in his place? Because that's one thing, but it's another to ascribe such a negative connotation to Worf's actions, when they were perfectly understandable at the time.

Understandable how? Because he was a first time parent? See above.

I may be imposing what I think is the right thing to do in this situation if it were me, but I also impose those characteristics that Worf purports to hold dear: honor. Is sending Alexander away the honorable thing to do?

That's up for debate, but it's a question that the episode fails to address in a meaningful way. And that is unfortunate.

Besides, as I mentioned before, it's a moot point since we all know less than a year later, Alexander wound up coming to live with Worf on the Enterprise anyway.

It's not a moot point. He's sending Alexander away. Just because Alexander returns doesn't mean these actions Worf is taking aren't up for discussion.

Worf is a character rife with contradictions, the contradictions in his personality are pointed out often, especially by Troi. To accept Worf as a compelling character is to accept these contradictions as part of the narrative. He's not a real person. I think you are supposed to be disappointed with his decision to send Alexander away.

See, that wasn't clear to me. If the episode was going for controversy, exploration of ideas, and ethics, it didn't do a very good job because an episode that was effectively exploring those ideas would have someone challenge Worf's reasoning.

Worf refusing to help the Romulans, or subjecting himself to dishonor for the "greater glory". Those issues were explored and brought forth effectively. Worf's decision to send Alexander away was treated as a convenient afterthought, not as a controversial decision to be explored.

Worf, being a Klingon, always thinks about battle first. He's thinking, Is this ship going to get into a fight and get my son killed?

But wouldn't his next thought be "And that will be glorious! I'll be the proudest Klingon father who ever lived!"?

Timo Saloniemi

This would be the best excuse, but if the episode had been better written, these issues and controversies would've been more clear.

 

[doubleohfive]

Talk about shortsighted. So you're saying Worf's lack of experience being a parent is justification for effectively abandoning him to his grandparents?

Christ on a pogo stick. You make it sound like Alexander becomes Oliver goddamn Twist. Worf did not "abandon" Alexander. Worf sent Alexander to live with his parents on Earth. You know, the humans who raised him, to maintain as close a continuity of an environment to raise the child as he had already had with K'Ehleyr.

So does that mean all first time parents should simply have their first born live with their grandparents full time? Interesting.

Of course not. You're ascribing generalities to this specific situation, which would be hard to do given that we're talking about people three hundred years in the future, among whom are people from a distinctive alien race. Maybe dial that one back, mmkay?

Understandable how? Because he was a first time parent? See above.

No. Understandble given that Worf was an officer in the fleet, on a ship at the forefront of exploration and at times combat. Hardly the environment (in Worf's opinion) that a child should be in, especially one barely two years old regardless of how fast they mature.

I may be imposing what I think is the right thing to do in this situation if it were me, but I also impose those characteristics that Worf purports to hold dear: honor. Is sending Alexander away the honorable thing to do?

For the last time, yes. Worf makes his reasons very clear in the episode why he's sending Alexander to live with his parents.

Are you saying then that Worf is dishonorable? By your earlier query, it would seem that this one thing ruins the character for you. Is that what you're saying?

I doubt it is -- you just don't like that instead of Worf made a hard decision -- that was in the best interest of Alexander -- to give him a home with a backyard on a nice planet with grandparents who would love him and take care of him.

Just because you would put your ideas of what constitutes "honorable" before the needs of Alexander (or whatever child in whatever scenario is being discussed) does not invalidate the choice Worf made here, nor the perfectly understandable and reasonable decision it was at the time.

 

[Ghrakh]

eh, Worf had a surprise son (that he apparently was never told about), then the mother was killed, all in a very short time. I can completely understand what he did.

 

[EnriqueH]

Christ on a pogo stick. You make it sound like Alexander becomes Oliver goddamn Twist. Worf did not "abandon" Alexander. Worf sent Alexander to live with his parents on Earth. You know, the humans who raised him, to maintain as close a continuity of an environment to raise the child as he had already had with K'Ehleyr.

So let me rephrase the question: Is it ok for first time parents to drop off their kid with their grandparents due to lack of experience, as you put it?

Of course not. You're ascribing generalities to this specific situation, which would be hard to do given that we're talking about people three hundred years in the future, among whom are people from a distinctive alien race. Maybe dial that one back, mmkay?

Actually, i'm attempting to clarify your response. You said Worf has no parental experience and therefore has justification for sending his son away to live with his grandparents. Is that or is that not what you tried to say? If not, I need clarification because I'm still not understanding why you say it's "justified" that Worf send Alexander away. You also state that we're talking about the future. What does the future have to do with this topic about sending Alexander away? I think you need to develop your ideas here to make a compelling argument rather than resorting to cute memes.

No. Understandble given that Worf was an officer in the fleet, on a ship at the forefront of exploration and at times combat. Hardly the environment (in Worf's opinion) that a child should be in, especially one barely two years old regardless of how fast they mature.

For the last time, yes. Worf makes his reasons very clear in the episode why he's sending Alexander to live with his parents.

Are you saying then that Worf is dishonorable? By your earlier query, it would seem that this one thing ruins the character for you. Is that what you're saying?

I doubt it is -- you just don't like that instead of Worf made a hard decision -- that was in the best interest of Alexander -- to give him a home with a backyard on a nice planet with grandparents who would love him and take care of him.

Just because you would put your ideas of what constitutes "honorable" before the needs of Alexander (or whatever child in whatever scenario is being discussed) does not invalidate the choice Worf made here, nor the perfectly understandable and reasonable decision it was at the time.

I think raising Alexander was the "harder" thing to do. Sending him away was too easy. If Worf had a price on his head, or was heading into battle, that would be one thing. But his same old mission on the Enterprise, where there are other families and children, I might add.

And no, this does not ruin the character. I'm just surprised that Worf makes such a decision given his bravery and honor earlier in the series.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think raising Alexander was the "harder" thing to do. Sending him away was too easy.

Or perhaps it was the other way around: Even though Worf had precisely sod-all in the way of parental experience, keeping Alexander with him might be seen as ego - a kind of "Look how great a father I am, I've got my boy with me". Sending Alexander to the Rozhenkos, on the other hand, means Worf doesn't care what anyone else thinks of him, his only concern is for the boy's safety.

And doesn't that take some kind of courage? Worf knows people may think of him as a shitty father (like many in this thread are doing), and yet he risks that anyway, all so Alexander can have a better life. And not with strangers either - with people Worf knows and trusts, his own foster parents.

 

[doubleohfive]

Christ on a pogo stick. You make it sound like Alexander becomes Oliver goddamn Twist. Worf did not "abandon" Alexander. Worf sent Alexander to live with his parents on Earth. You know, the humans who raised him, to maintain as close a continuity of an environment to raise the child as he had already had with K'Ehleyr.

So let me rephrase the question: Is it ok for first time parents to drop off their kid with their grandparents due to lack of experience, as you put it?

That depends. Is the first-time parent stationed on a military ship? Is the child two years old? Is the first-time parent a single parent who has regular duties to perform?

Granted, the Enterprise isn't entirely a military vessel, but in terms of the real world analogy to make it relatable, (i.e. it would have to be a military ship in our present-day world as we know it.) If so, then I'd say it's absolutely ok for that first-time parent to leave the child with his or her grandparents.

Of course not. You're ascribing generalities to this specific situation, which would be hard to do given that we're talking about people three hundred years in the future, among whom are people from a distinctive alien race. Maybe dial that one back, mmkay?

Actually, i'm attempting to clarify your response. You said Worf has no parental experience and therefore has justification for sending his son away to live with his grandparents. Is that or is that not what you tried to say? If not, I need clarification because I'm still not understanding why you say it's "justified" that Worf send Alexander away. You also state that we're talking about the future. What does the future have to do with this topic about sending Alexander away?

1) Worf had no parental experience and had only learned he was a parent a short time before K'Ehlyr was killed.

2) Recognizing that he served aboard a starship that was in danger on a pretty regular basis, he made the judgment call that his kid would be safer and better off being raised on Earth by his grandparents.

That alone is all the justification one needs.

No. Understandble given that Worf was an officer in the fleet, on a ship at the forefront of exploration and at times combat. Hardly the environment (in Worf's opinion) that a child should be in, especially one barely two years old regardless of how fast they mature.

For the last time, yes. Worf makes his reasons very clear in the episode why he's sending Alexander to live with his parents.

Are you saying then that Worf is dishonorable? By your earlier query, it would seem that this one thing ruins the character for you. Is that what you're saying?

I doubt it is -- you just don't like that instead of Worf made a hard decision -- that was in the best interest of Alexander -- to give him a home with a backyard on a nice planet with grandparents who would love him and take care of him.

Just because you would put your ideas of what constitutes "honorable" before the needs of Alexander (or whatever child in whatever scenario is being discussed) does not invalidate the choice Worf made here, nor the perfectly understandable and reasonable decision it was at the time.

I think raising Alexander was the "harder" thing to do. Sending him away was too easy.

Well well well! That's a clever little bit of goal-post moving you're doing there. First it was that Worf was not honorable, now it's that he took the easy way out. Whether raising Alexander at that point in time or not was easy or hard isn't the argument you've been making. You've been asserting that Worf was somehow less honorable because he put the needs of his child ahead of his own. That's what I'm arguing against because I disagree with it.

If Worf had a price on his head, or was heading into battle, that would be one thing. But his same old mission on the Enterprise, where there are other families and children, I might add.

...Other families and children who were complicit in their joining the crew. Alexander was not given any choice in that matter until Worf intervened to let him go back to the only home he'd ever known -- Earth.

 

[EnriqueH]

I think raising Alexander was the "harder" thing to do. Sending him away was too easy.

Or perhaps it was the other way around: Even though Worf had precisely sod-all in the way of parental experience, keeping Alexander with him might be seen as ego - a kind of "Look how great a father I am, I've got my boy with me". Sending Alexander to the Rozhenkos, on the other hand, means Worf doesn't care what anyone else thinks of him, his only concern is for the boy's safety.

If that were true than ALL first time parents would be sending their children away. Those that don't are trying to "show off how great they are"??? Is that your explanation???

And doesn't that take some kind of courage? Worf knows people may think of him as a shitty father (like many in this thread are doing), and yet he risks that anyway, all so Alexander can have a better life. And not with strangers either - with people Worf knows and trusts, his own foster parents.

Sounds pretty feeble. Alexander staying aboard with his father is courageous. Brushing him off to live on Earth is easier. How is sending Alexander away more courageous? So does that mean dead beat dads are more courageous than those that stay at home and try to raise their own sons and daughters? That's what it sounds like coming from you guys.

 

[EnriqueH]

---SNIP---


Well well well! That's a clever little bit of goal-post moving you're doing there. First it was that Worf was not honorable, now it's that he took the easy way out. Whether raising Alexander at that point in time or not was easy or hard isn't the argument you've been making. You've been asserting that Worf was somehow less honorable because he put the needs of his child ahead of his own. That's what I'm arguing against because I disagree with it.

"Goal post moving"? In what way?

To me, sending your kid off is both EASY and NOT honorable. The exception of course being that the Enterprise was about to engage in some sort of war or military operation. But the Enterprise is a ship of peace, not a ship of war (to paraphrase Guinan). And there are families aboard the Enterprise. So Worf's decision to send Alexander away makes no honorable sense because they are still on a peaceful mission.

...Other families and children who were complicit in their joining the crew. Alexander was not given any choice in that matter until Worf intervened to let him go back to the only home he'd ever known -- Earth.

In "Suddenly Human", Picard said he was the criminal because he did not take into account Chad Allen's feelings.

In "Reunion", Worf does not account for Alexander's feelings, especially since his mother just died. You would think that, if anything, Alexander would NEED Worf at this particular moment, his mother just having been murdered. He doesn't stay to help Alexander through this trauma, he just ships him to be with grandma and grandpa and let them deal Alexander.


Convenient.

Oh, by the way, weren't Grandpa and Grandma strangers to Alexander? Correct me if I'm wrong. Oh, so now Alexander not only has to grieve for mom without dad, he has to get used to a grandma and grandpa that are strangers to him? Niiiiiice.

 

[doubleohfive]

To me, sending your kid off is both EASY and NOT honorable. The exception of course being that the Enterprise was about to engage in some sort of war or military operation. But the Enterprise is a ship of peace, not a ship of war (to paraphrase Guinan).

...and yet, the Enterprise still found its way into numerous conflicts and battles over the course of the seven years. Something, as chief of security, Worf was all too familiar with and conditions which he probably felt a two year old child with no mother was ill-suited to cope with suddenly.

And there are families aboard the Enterprise. So Worf's decision to send Alexander away makes no honorable sense because they are still on a peaceful mission.

It could have been a ship full of Mother Theresas. It doesn't mean they wouldn't still run into the Cardassians, the Romulans, Q, the Borg, the Ferengi, or whatever pirates, criminals or adversaries they continually encountered. Again, as chief of security Worf was implicitly aware of the dangers of shipboard life and may well have also just plain not wanted his son exposed to that at so young an age. I bet Ben Sisko probably regrets bringing his family aboard the Saratoga, too.

...Other families and children who were complicit in their joining the crew. Alexander was not given any choice in that matter until Worf intervened to let him go back to the only home he'd ever known -- Earth.

In "Suddenly Human", Picard said he was the criminal because he did not take into account Chad Allen's feelings.

Jono was a teenager by then and had lived his entire life among the Talarians. Alexander was less than two years old and had only known a life with his mother on Earth. Now you're proposing that he be ripped away from everything he knows? just so he can fit your narrow-minded idea of what constitutes "honorable parenting?"

And I still don't see what's so bad about trusting his own parents -- the people who raised Worf himself -- with taking care of Alexander. Nothing you've suggested or offered thus far has proven why that's such a bad thing, apart from it not fitting in to your idea of what kind of father Worf should have been.

In "Reunion", Worf does not account for Alexander's feelings, especially since his mother just died.

He does, but he does so as you or I would worry about the feelings of a toddler.

You would think that, if anything, Alexander would NEED Worf at this particular moment, his mother just having been murdered.

Perhaps. But remember, until the final moments of the show, to Alexander, Worf is just a burly stranger his mom kind of knows. You don't just get to be Instant-Cuddle-Dad just because Alexander is smart enough to ask the right question.

 

[EnriqueH]

...and yet, the Enterprise still found its way into numerous conflicts and battles over the course of the seven years.

Which should pose no problem...for a warrior.

It could have been a ship full of Mother Theresas. It doesn't mean they wouldn't still run into the Cardassians, the Romulans, Q, the Borg, the Ferengi, or whatever pirates, criminals or adversaries they continually encountered. Again, as chief of security Worf was implicitly aware of the dangers of shipboard life and may well have also just plain not wanted his son exposed to that at so young an age. I bet Ben Sisko probably regrets bringing his family aboard the Saratoga, too.

Except Worf is a warrior, Sisko is not. At least in the Klingon sense of the word.

Jono was a teenager by then and had lived his entire life among the Talarians. Alexander was less than two years old and had only known a life with his mother on Earth. Now you're proposing that he be ripped away from everything he knows? just so he can fit your narrow-minded idea of what constitutes "honorable parenting?"

Who is really being narrow minded? (Not to mention, accusatory.) You don't seem to understand. This isn't so much about my idea of parenting, but my idea of what a Klingon would do. Worf's actions are not consistent with his values. Honorable parenting is being their for your kid, especially in their time of need, which this was definitely a time of need for Alexander. I just expected Worf, with his sense of honor and duty, to be a responsible father.

Perhaps. But remember, until the final moments of the show, to Alexander, Worf is just a burly stranger his mom kind of knows. You don't just get to be Instant-Cuddle-Dad just because Alexander is smart enough to ask the right question.

Poor Alexander. His mother, butchered. His dad, barely known. Off to live with his grandparents, who he doesn't even know.

I still don't see what's so bad about trusting his own parents -- the people who raised Worf himself -- with taking care of Alexander. Nothing you've suggested or offered thus far has proven why that's such a bad thing, apart from it not fitting in to your idea of what kind of father Worf should have been.

You're not a parent, are you?

I guess we should agree to disagree.

 

[JD5000]

Should be, would be, could be....none of this matters in the context of the fictional character of Worf and the fictional setting of Star Trek. He did what he did, he makes his reasons for doing so clear in episodes involving Alexander, regardless if any of us think they are good reasons or not.

It's just part of the plot and has no reflection on any ideal of parenting or anything like that. It's the story of one Klingon dad and his part-human, part-Klingon son.

I don't think Picard should have just returned Hugh to the Borg Collective unharmed either, but he did. It happened in the story, and no amount of protest that he should have done differently will change that.

The extensive and somewhat heated discussion about this particular point makes me feel as if some posters are projecting personal experiences into a fictional story.

 

[doubleohfive]

I guess we should agree to disagree.

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

The extensive and somewhat heated discussion about this particular point makes me feel as if some posters are projecting personal experiences into a fictional story.

It certainly seems so!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I guess we should agree to disagree.

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

I am so stealing that.

 

[EnriqueH]

Should be, would be, could be....none of this matters in the context of the fictional character of Worf and the fictional setting of Star Trek. He did what he did, he makes his reasons for doing so clear in episodes involving Alexander, regardless if any of us think they are good reasons or not.

It's just part of the plot and has no reflection on any ideal of parenting or anything like that. It's the story of one Klingon dad and his part-human, part-Klingon son.

I don't think Picard should have just returned Hugh to the Borg Collective unharmed either, but he did. It happened in the story, and no amount of protest that he should have done differently will change that.

The extensive and somewhat heated discussion about this particular point makes me feel as if some posters are projecting personal experiences into a fictional story.

I thought we were just discussing and debating back and forth? An exchange of ideas? Isn't that conversation what makes things interesting? It's philosophical.

I guess we should agree to disagree.

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

I'll take that as a "win" on my part.

You're not a parent, are you?

 

[doubleohfive]

I guess we should agree to disagree.

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

I'll take that as a "win" on my part.

I don't see how that can constitute a "win" for you, but whatever; I've not been able to make head nor tails of your bonkers reasoning in this thread since you started it, so I'm not surprised at all that you'd spin this your way in such lazy fashion.

You're not a parent, are you?

Whether or not I'm a parent does not preclude me from nor does it somehow make me more or less able to defend the choices made by a fictional character in a fictional future after a fictional crime robs a fictional character of his fictional mother.

I'm guessing you're waiting for me to tell you "Nope, not a parent" so you can lord over us the fact that you are. To that I say, "Congratulations! I'm sure your children bring you much joy and happiness."

Or, you're waiting for me to tell you "Yep, I am!" and then criticize whatever imaginary parenting skills you think I might have (or lack, thereof) based on this tiresome, blown-out-of-proportion, ridiculous argument.

Regardless, whether or not I'm a parent has no bearing on the discussion here because Worf's choices in the episode were perfectly valid, honorable, and sensible given the context of the show. It's unfortunate that you aren't able to see that.

For the hat trick:

I'm pretty sure pestering people to reveal personal information might be against the rules here, so you might want to look in to it before asking that question again.

 

[doubleohfive]

I guess we should agree to disagree.

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

I am so stealing that.

Feel free to sig it.

 

[EnriqueH]

Certainly. The difference is, you're wrong.

I'll take that as a "win" on my part.

I don't see how that can constitute a "win" for you, but whatever; I've not been able to make head nor tails of your bonkers reasoning in this thread since you started it

Not sure why you're resorting to personal jibes, when all I'm trying to do is engage in an intelligent exchange of ideas, but the feeling is mutual: I haven't been able to make any sense of your side of it myself..

so I'm not surprised at all that you'd spin this your way in such lazy fashion.

Oh, you mean kinda like using memes and making snide comments? Is that what you mean?

Whether or not I'm a parent does not preclude me from nor does it somehow make me more or less able to defend the choices made by a fictional character in a fictional future after a fictional crime robs a fictional character of his fictional mother.

I'm guessing you're waiting for me to tell you "Nope, not a parent" so you can lord over us the fact that you are. To that I say, "Congratulations! I'm sure your children bring you much joy and happiness."

Or, you're waiting for me to tell you "Yep, I am!" and then criticize whatever imaginary parenting skills you think I might have (or lack, thereof) based on this tiresome, blown-out-of-proportion, ridiculous argument.

Regardless, whether or not I'm a parent has no bearing on the discussion here because Worf's choices in the episode were perfectly valid, honorable, and sensible given the context of the show. It's unfortunate that you aren't able to see that.

For the hat trick:

I'm pretty sure pestering people to reveal personal information might be against the rules here, so you might want to look in to it before asking that question again.

If you want to talk about pestering, one need not look anywhere but your own replies to me in this thread which include personal jibes (complete with a few lame memes and jokes at my expense) and, quite frankly, disrespectful attitude. In fact, when I tried to end the discussion amicably, your classy reply was that "I was wrong".

True, I'm trying to engage in a philosophical discussion, but a review by moderators will likely show that you've engaged in personal jibes.

But to get back to my asking of you being a parent...

My asking if you're a parent only means I'm trying to get you to see it from the child's POV to see where I'm coming from. There's to ill intent because it pertains to the discussion.

Your getting personal is about attacking, my asking you if you're a parent is about the discussion. And that's the difference.

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

We're on the edge of a couple of warnings here. Drop the personal BS now, please.

Also note, I don't care who is "right", just can it.

 

[doubleohfive]

EDIT: Never mind. Mutai got in here before I could submit, so I'm editing my post.

To repeat:

Worf made a perfectly valid choice in sending Alexander to live with his parents on Earth after K'Ehleyr was killed. Nothing about that choice was dishonorable or indicative of a lack of courage or responsibility on Worf's part.

Asking about whether or not I'm a parent is personal information about me, which might be, to you, relevant to the discussion but as I've stated, is not necessary for the discussion to continue nor is it required in order for me to make my point, which I feel, honestly, I've done admirably (if repeatedly.)

I'm happy to take this up further over PM, if you would like to, EnriqueH.

 

[EnriqueH]

Bring it.