What is THE Worst continuity error in Trek history..?!

[T'Arwen]

I already suspected DCF wasn't really together with the rest of t h e makers of Trek on this. I'd heard she'd meant the Romulan Commander and Spock to be falling in love for real. Then I heard the opposite though, that it was people besides her pushing for that change to her script. And if she's announcing Vulcans just simply fall in love just like other peoples, then she's never paid attention to This Side of Paradise and many other episodes. In fact , she's missing the point of what Vulcans are.

Unless you know some behind-the-scenes thing that I don't, Theodore Sturgeon wrote Amok Time, not DC Fontana. And if she's right, pon farr has no meaning except as an excuse for a few action scenes. It becomes a bad episode.

I'm a Trek FM fan and the podcasts talk about DC Fontana a lot more than Sturgeon. My mistake. But later, we see or have implied evidence that Vulcans have sex outside of pon farr. There's T'Pol in Harbinger and some of Tuvok's kids are less than 7 years apart. Is that a continuity violation to you?

Really, not limiting sex to every 7 years makes pon farr an excuse for some action scenes? To me the interesting part was seeing the normally calm Spock not having everything together. And the shame surrounding it. A little mystery doesn't hurt. For the record, most of us who agree with Fontana consider Amok Time one of the top episodes of TOS.

Here's a good summary of pon farr throughout all the shows.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/biology-other.htm

As for Romulans and pon farr, I think it can go either way. Nothing in the shows or movies ever addressed this.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Seems like every 10 years or so for me.......

 

[UnknownSample]

I'm a Trek FM fan and the podcasts talk about DC Fontana a lot more than Sturgeon. My mistake. But later, we see or have implied evidence that Vulcans have sex outside of pon farr. There's T'Pol in Harbinger and some of Tuvok's kids are less than 7 years apart. Is that a continuity violation to you?

Really, not limiting sex to every 7 years makes pon farr an excuse for some action scenes? To me the interesting part was seeing the normally calm Spock not having everything together. And the shame surrounding it. A little mystery doesn't hurt. For the record, most of us who agree with Fontana consider Amok Time one of the top episodes of TOS.

Here's a good summary of pon farr throughout all the shows.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/biology-other.htm

As for Romulans and pon farr, I think it can go either way. Nothing in the shows or movies ever addressed this.

Well, Trek is full of little glitches that have never been worked out. The seven years thing is just one of many. Some small conflicting details from later, lesser Treks can't retroactively wipe out the concept of a Vulcan from the original series.
----------------------------
If Amok Time is just about a meaningless lust for combat every seven years, then it's just a pretext for fight scenes. And a bad episode. They really didn't make ST episodes that were about nothing though, not at this point.
---------------------------------
Why would there BE such an urge, with the biological imperative satisfied at any and all times they want?
-------------------------------
WHY would there be this big, glaring exception (sex) to the Vulcan disciplines to control urges and feelings? Add in DCF's apparent conviction that Vulcans fall in love like every body else, and there, you've just blown the whole concept of Vulcans into little bits with a bazooka. It's gone. Vulcans are totally emotional. They're only different from us because of the pointy ears.
-------------------------
"No emotions" means no emotions.
--------------------
McCoy said it... pon farr is the price they pay for having so much control the rest of the time. It's an issue Trek liked to deal with, what happens when drives are pushed down under the surface, in the name of progress or civilization. That's what's going on in Return of the Archons. Landru forced a whole population to repress feelings and urges, to the point where Festival was needed as a safety valve and to continue the race. You can't push all that stuff under, and not have it come surging back at some point. And bloodless, bland zombies don't reproduce. (Yes, those were rapes going on.)
---------------------
That's one of the points of view of the show-- emotion, drives, urges, are hard as hell to suppress, and complicated things happen when you try.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

"No emotions" means no emotions.

Only for Kolinahr adepts, and that's rare.

 

[UnknownSample]

Only for Kolinahr adepts, and that's rare.

Splitting hairs. Missing forest for trees. Vulcans are about controlling all emotion... not about being utterly without it in the first place. Control. They're not about letting loose with primal urges, laughing their heads off at stand-up comedy, or writing love sonnets.

They are a "concept species". and that's the concept.

 

[eyeresist]

"No emotions" means no emotions.

Vulcans don't have no emotions. They have them, but they control them.

I am wondering in light of this debate exactly how Sarek courted Amanda.

• If Sarek was in Pon Farr, he would be a rampaging beast, which I guess Amanda might find attractive, but once Sarek had had sex or killed someone he would revert to neutral mode, effectively undergoing a total personality change. If that situation actually lead to a long-term loving relationship (as depicted in the show and movies), then Amanda must be deeply masochistic and/or codependent.
• If Sarek was not in Pon Farr, and had zero emotions or sex drive, there would be no reason for him to hook up with Amanda, unless he decided by pure logic. In "Journey to Babel" Sarek says "It seemed the logical thing to do." OTOH, that ep also shows Sarek behaving in a very chauvinistic way, which later sensibilities have preferred to retcon out of existence. I think the majority of fans prefer Sarek's admission in ST09 (after he has earlier attributed his decision to logic): "You asked me once why I married your mother. I married her because I loved her."

I don't remember much about Spock's emotional profile in TOS (apart from THE WOMEN!), but he demonstrated emotion a number of times in the movies, admittedly in extreme situations: he wept for V'ger, was angry with Valeris, and showed love for Kirk.
I think the fan consensus at this point is that Vulcans have emotions, but they subdue and hide them.

 

[UnknownSample]

Vulcans don't have no emotions. They have them, but they control them.

I KNOW. Good grief, please see what I just posted before your last one.

As for Sarek, remember the Next Gen episode "Sarek". While on some repressed level he did love his wife, as Picard-as-Sarek said, it took the upheaval of a disease destroying emotional control in order to bring that feeling and admission out, onto the surface. They made clear that Sarek's normal, usual existence, and that of other Vulcans, was one of severe suppression of emotion, and strict control of it, so that it is not felt. Rather, they do the best they can. Which is a great deal. They don't merely "hide" emotion. It's rigorous internal control, a suppression and denial of feeling.

 

[eyeresist]

I KNOW. Good grief, please see what I just posted before your last one.

But you said

"No emotions" means no emotions.

Why did you say that if you didn't mean Vulcans have no emotions?

 

[UnknownSample]

But you said
Why did you say that if you didn't mean Vulcans have no emotions?

You're asking me what I meant. Since I just explained this in a new post, and pointed this out , I'll leave you to actually go back and read it.

 

[eyeresist]

They made clear that Sarek's normal, usual existence, and that of other Vulcans, was one of severe suppression of emotion, and strict control of it, so that it is not felt.

An emotion that is not felt doesn't actually exist.

 

[Marsden]

Fascinating, how emotional Humans can be when discussing Vulcan emotions.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

The way Spock describes it in the episode, one gets the idea this is the first time it has happened.

It was. Spock outright says in "I hoped that I would be spared this" in "Amok Time." He'd never gone through a Pon Farr before that. A theory that I really like was that Spock was unconsciously suppressing his Pon Farrs due to his distaste of T'Pring. That's why it happened earlier for the regenerated Spock in TSFS. There was no emotion clouding the issue, so young Spock's Pon Farr was a purely biological process.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

A theory that I really like was that Spock was unconsciously suppressing his Pon Farrs due to his distaste of T'Pring.

Is it wrong that my first reaction to this was, "Who wouldn't?"

 

[FormerLurker]

It was. Spock outright says in "I hoped that I would be spared this" in "Amok Time." He'd never gone through a Pon Farr before that. A theory that I really like was that Spock was unconsciously suppressing his Pon Farrs due to his distaste of T'Pring. That's why it happened earlier for the regenerated Spock in TSFS. There was no emotion clouding the issue, so young Spock's Pon Farr was a purely biological process.

Thank you for not misinterpreting my statement as a broad overview of all Vulcans. I appreciate it.

And to Mr. Laser Beam: No, it isn't wrong at all. Like a wise man said once, for every beautiful woman, there is someone that is sick of her shit.

 

[UnknownSample]

An emotion that is not felt doesn't actually exist.

We can feel all sorts of things without very much conscious awareness of them. We experience things on different levels of consciousness. We push all sorts of feelings and memories, etc ., onto a lower, less conscious level, especially if we don't consider it right or acceptable to feel these things, because it goes against one's religion, say, or because one is a Vulcan.
---------------------------
People become alienated from their own feelings all the time. It's just a basic part of sentience, to some extent or another.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Thank you for not misinterpreting my statement as a broad overview of all Vulcans. I appreciate it.

It never even occurred to me to read it that way. I would assume that if Pon Farr had never happened to any Vulcan before, they wouldn't already have a name for it.

 

[FormerLurker]

Another poster misinterpreted it on the previous page to mean I was saying no Vulcan in Starfleet had ever experienced Pon Farr. Which wasn't what I said.

 

[eyeresist]

We can feel all sorts of things without very much conscious awareness of them. We experience things on different levels of consciousness. We push all sorts of feelings and memories, etc ., onto a lower, less conscious level, especially if we don't consider it right or acceptable to feel these things, because it goes against one's religion, say, or because one is a Vulcan.
---------------------------
People become alienated from their own feelings all the time. It's just a basic part of sentience, to some extent or another.

It is possible to be unaware of one's emotions - "dissociation" is the word. I imagine Vulcans would be the opposite - 'hypervigilance".

Know thyself, as the ancient Greeks would say.

 

[UnknownSample]

It is possible to be unaware of one's emotions - "dissociation" is the word. I imagine Vulcans would be the opposite - 'hypervigilance".

Know thyself, as the ancient Greeks would say.

There would be a lot of both. I think it would vary among individuals, and their level of personal honesty.

 

[T'Arwen]

As for Sarek, remember the Next Gen episode "Sarek". While on some repressed level he did love his wife, as Picard-as-Sarek said, it took the upheaval of a disease destroying emotional control in order to bring that feeling and admission out, onto the surface. They made clear that Sarek's normal, usual existence, and that of other Vulcans, was one of severe suppression of emotion, and strict control of it, so that it is not felt. Rather, they do the best they can. Which is a great deal. They don't merely "hide" emotion. It's rigorous internal control, a suppression and denial of feeling.

Coincidentally, this is the biggest myth surrounding meditation. It's not about denying emotion, which is essentially like trying to push a ball back down into the water. It might not be right away, but it always comes back up. It's really about noticing and not reacting to emotions and sensations around. In "Why Can't I Meditate," the author even talks about a patient who discovers emotions they pushed down to the subconscious through meditation. That patient had gone for years without being aware of it. Does it always work? No. Happens all the time with T'Pol. Even though she has more trouble controlling emotions than the average Vulcan, she's still very dissociated from them, especially when they concern Trip. But meditation is hard and even people who have been doing it for years say it's always a work in progress.

Well, Trek is full of little glitches that have never been worked out. The seven years thing is just one of many. Some small conflicting details from later, lesser Treks can't retroactively wipe out the concept of a Vulcan from the original series.

Since pon farr is a big continuity lightning rod, I'm not sure if everyone would agree they're small details. It's not so contentious here but I have seen people get into fights on other message boards. The most anal review is on IMDB, where someone takes issue over a woman (T'Pol) going through pon farr and her not trying to go back to Vulcan while affected. To me, Spock's line of going home to spawn is only there because of T'Pring. If he returned Chapel's feelings, why the hell would he need to go back to Vulcan when a willing partner is right in front of him? That said, I doubt they really put as much thought into pon farr as you think if it gave way to all of these inconsistencies, real or perceived. I don't remember the source but I heard it was something to make Vulcan biology more exotic. That's not to say Amok Time is about nothing, just that they probably didn't think the topic would ever get revisited.

If Amok Time is just about a meaningless lust for combat every seven years, then it's just a pretext for fight scenes. And a bad episode. They really didn't make ST episodes that were about nothing though, not at this point.
---------------------------------
Why would there BE such an urge, with the biological imperative satisfied at any and all times they want?
-------------------------------
WHY would there be this big, glaring exception (sex) to the Vulcan disciplines to control urges and feelings? Add in DCF's apparent conviction that Vulcans fall in love like every body else, and there, you've just blown the whole concept of Vulcans into little bits with a bazooka. It's gone. Vulcans are totally emotional. They're only different from us because of the pointy ears.

It's not a black and white issue. If a Vulcan couple only did it once a year, it's still far less than the average human couple. That makes them different enough from us and thus, not "totally emotional." And I still have no idea how such a thing would lead to Amok Time being meaningless combat every seven years. Also, when you have a telepathic bond, I don't see how it's possible to repress love and it's associated emotions so that they're subconscious most of the time.

McCoy said it... pon farr is the price they pay for having so much control the rest of the time. It's an issue Trek liked to deal with, what happens when drives are pushed down under the surface, in the name of progress or civilization. That's what's going on in Return of the Archons. Landru forced a whole population to repress feelings and urges, to the point where Festival was needed as a safety valve and to continue the race. You can't push all that stuff under, and not have it come surging back at some point. And bloodless, bland zombies don't reproduce. (Yes, those were rapes going on.)
---------------------
That's one of the points of view of the show-- emotion, drives, urges, are hard as hell to suppress, and complicated things happen when you try.

Here's something we can agree on