Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 3x02 - "Disengage"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Enjoyed the episode. Like last week, it's obvious they are trying hard to play the nostalgia card ... alluding to the TOS movies when Picard and Riker approach the Titan in the shuttle and the resulting "ship porn", Picard and Riker lying on loft beds like Kirk and Bones in ST6, quoting the font of STII and the music of the TNG movies ... but what can I say, it does work for me. My nostalgia bone is triggered.
Now Picard has a son, much like Kirk got one in ST2.
Imo, there is nothing wrong with quoting past glory, as long as it's well done, so that it comes across as a bow, rather than a cheap copy. But so far, I can't complain. It really feels like the great rock band you loved so much when you were young, goes on a final goodbye tour. Who cares if they do a little playback here and there, as long as the spirit is right?
Now Picard has a son, much like Kirk got one in ST2.
Imo, there is nothing wrong with quoting past glory, as long as it's well done, so that it comes across as a bow, rather than a cheap copy. But so far, I can't complain. It really feels like the great rock band you loved so much when you were young, goes on a final goodbye tour. Who cares if they do a little playback here and there, as long as the spirit is right?
In Italy you can't name a child as a living parent or a living sibling. If they are dead you can use the same name (But I've honestly never heard of anyone ever doing that. I think that would be considered incredibly morbid.)
Anything that is not connected in some way to the US is by default a mistake, didn't you know that?
Last edited:
Honestly? I think it is something they invented for just one episode and that in the minds of the writers of the series women take their husband's surname by default, exactly as it happens in the USA (they tell me it happens a little less now, but it's still a widespread custom).The Howard women retained their surname down all those generations of marriage and births. Bev was the first one in ages to take a dude's name. Read into that what you will.
Well, because the writers of the new series realized that we live in the 21st century? I've done some research and it seems that only recently in the States is anyone realizing that it's an incredibly patriarchal tradition. I found this article from 2013(!) titled "Why should married women change their names?" and honestly it seems to me rather late to ask this question.
The point is that the future of Star Trek, which always wants to be portrayed as enlightened and progressive, adopts American-centric ways that are already considered archaic and sexist in the rest of the world now
.However, I recognize that it is something more related to the old series. Now that it is known that the audience is potentially all over the world thanks to streaming, they try to be more attentive to certain details. They don't always succeed.
Last edited:
Hm, here in Germany, it's still default that the wife takes the husbands name, but for the last 40 years or so, double names are not rare at all, and a little later, it became not uncommon that either both would keep their respective surnames or the husband takes the wife's name.
Troi is her grandfather's name.
Does Lwaxana have a surname even if she has all that rank?
The Howards are from a small colony planet of cousin fuckers.
They are all called Howard.
Did Bev get rid of a cute accent before going to Earth?
Or Ian actually took Lwaxana's surname, not the other way around. Or he just kept his own name, Ian Andrew. And Lwaxana kept her own, Lwaxana Troi. We don't know.
S2 looks to have a totally different setup, and even in s1 only like 6 episodes (out of 20) involved confrontation with the Diviner or his underlings. In the rest, he was a very distant threat or not in a position to do anything.
And "the formula" that was talked about was aping TWOK, which is not the case for Prodigy. The Diviner is hardly Dal's personal nemesis, he has reasons for what he is doing that do not involve personal revenge. And Khan did not want to destroy Starfleet, he had a thing for Kirk very specifically, so how is Prodigy a copy?
Another difference is that the various bad guys in Prodigy are capable of changing their minds. We didnt see Khan do that, not even after his defeat.
Prodigy's arc with the vau n'akat as antagonists is rather comparable to ds9 and its Dominion arc, for me. Did ds9 also ape TWOK? I don't think so.
In Italy the wife has not taken her husband's surname for more than (checking) sixty years. You can add it to your own but only for social occasions. Legally and on papers she keeps her maiden name. You can request to change it legally but I read that it is a rather complex procedure, it must be motivated and it is not always accepted.
Given Betazoid society shows some very strong matriarchal elements, it's certainly possible that female surnames become the family name instead of male surnames as in most Earth cultures.
Well the intentions of the authors are clear: Lwaxana took her husband's surname (simply because they are American authors in the 80s and for them it was the default). But you're right in the sense that there's no clear evidence on screen that she took him or he took hers.
Last edited:
In Hungary, as recently as 15 years ago, it was still customary (e.g. for 2 out of every 3 marriages) for women to not only take their husband's name but to have their entire legal name changed to what basically means "wife of [husband's name]" and nothing else, with an additional 20% opting for "[maiden name], wife of [husband's surname]", which is the only common traditional form that is still popular today, competing with other forms (e.g. taking the husband's surname in western style, hyphenating or just keeping your own).
I never assumed Lwaxana took her husbands name, indeed having a name like “Ian Andrew Troi” rather than “Ian Troi” suggests he took hers in addition.
But we have no proof on screen of that. And really. We are talking about the US in the 80s. I'm sure that the authors couldn't even fathom that a woman could not take husband's surname. I mean. This is from an article from 2013!:
But why, in 2013, does getting married mean giving up the most basic marker of your identity? And if family unity is so important, why don't men ever change their names?
On one level, I get it: people are really hard on married women who don't change their names. Ten percent of the American public still thinks that keeping your name means you aren't dedicated to your marriage. And a full 50% of Americans think you should be legally required to take your husband's name. Somewhere upwards of 90% of women do change their names when they get married. I understand, given the social judgment of a sexist culture, why some women would decide that a name change is the path of least resistance.
"And a full 50% of Americans think you should be legally required to take your husband's name." In 2013. And I suppose that in the 1987 that number was around 99,99% if anyone bothered to ask.
