There were no Klingons in the high council chambers with hair, there were no Klingons at the Orion embassy with hair, even the followers of Molor were bald.
Kol who appeared to be completely against what T’Kuvma stood for, was bald.
Plus they are already going contridictong that explanation for season 2, so why are we arguing this point?
I too am confused as to why you're approaching this discussion as an argument, considering that what I initially posted was meant in
support of what
you yourself were saying upthread to begin with...
From what has
been said by Glenn Hetrick and Mary Chieffo, it really doesn't sound to me like what they're going with for Season Two contradicts what Sullivan suggested earlier so much as
expands and
expounds upon it. It's all tied to the legend of Kahless cutting off his hair in preparation to fight Molor (the exact purpose of which—forging the first
bat'leth—seems to be a specific piece of the story known only to a select few by the time of "Rightful Heir") and the emulation of that act.
Sullivan never said this practice was
exclusive to T'Kuvma's house alone, and as you and others quite rightly point out, such an interpretation of what he
did say would not match what we see onscreen in Season One. Indeed, at the very least, T'Kuvma would seem to have been gaining influence within the Empire for some time prior to the Battle at the Binary Stars (thus making it possible for that event to serve as the ultimate clincher to his long-striven-for goal of Klingon unification, such as it be). Kol was clearly resentful of that influence, and eager to "put [T'Kuvma]
back in [his] place." Having had to kowtow to such "puritan ways" in the face of their increasing popularity would no doubt only have added fuel to such resentment. Moreover, Kol was positioning himself to supplant T'Kuvma as leader of his movement, and co-opt it to his own advantage. Putting on the appearance of walking the walk would provide good cover for his lack of conviction with respect to the talk being talked, no?
But in any case, T'Kuvma himself wouldn't have been the instigator of this particular practice at all, even if he
might have been a contributor to its propagation, because his childhood bullies were seen to be bald as well.
As for the followers of Molor, what would be so odd about them adopting a tactic that supposedly enabled the tyrant's nemesis to defeat him in the first place? It certainly wouldn't be out of character for Klingons to revere a superior opponent. But on the other hand, for all we know, it's also possible that by day these folks masquerade as dutiful and upstanding devotees of Kahless, with the dim and shadowy (and extraterritorial?) corners of the Orion enclave being one of few places they'd feel at liberty to display their infidel rituals openly.
In short, maybe a lot of things. We'll see what more (or little) is offered up on the subject in a couple of months. There will no doubt always be at least a few unexplored threads left dangling that we'll have to come up with our own speculative explanations for, if we aren't content to simply overlook them, just as ever. No big deal (or surprise) there.
Again, I echo your sentiment: why
are "we" arguing here, exactly?
-
MMoM
I deleted the post.
