I don't get it.
- Thread starter Wonderlust King
- Start date
Mrs Paris
Captain
I don't think that someone who only lives 9 years is any less believable then let's say a shapeshifter
Actually I think the Ocampa are MORE believable.
Mrs Paris
Captain
exactly
^
Well, the real issue isn't even the nine years, it's the one child thing.
That's negitve growth, its really hard for a species to develop with negative growth. Since it isn't cultural, but natural it brings up a lot of questions like: how could something evolve in such a way? It completely goes against "survival of the fittest."
Well, the real issue isn't even the nine years, it's the one child thing.
That's negitve growth, its really hard for a species to develop with negative growth. Since it isn't cultural, but natural it brings up a lot of questions like: how could something evolve in such a way? It completely goes against "survival of the fittest."
The point is that neither the lifespan nor the "one-child syndrome" did work. It was only there because the writers didn't even bother to correct those mistakes, they probably thought "ah, just let it roll, the fans won't notice".
A species with such a short lifespan could never develope to anything more than a primate. It's impossible that they could learn and develope with such a short lifespan.
And I won't even comment on the "one-child syndrome". Anyone with a slightest knowledge of mathematics can see the point.
It's really sad that narrow-minded writers screwed up one of the more interesting species in Star Trek. The Ocampa would have been great aliens without those errors. It's also sad that they didn't even bother to do somehing about it.
A species with such a short lifespan could never develope to anything more than a primate. It's impossible that they could learn and develope with such a short lifespan.
And I won't even comment on the "one-child syndrome". Anyone with a slightest knowledge of mathematics can see the point.
It's really sad that narrow-minded writers screwed up one of the more interesting species in Star Trek. The Ocampa would have been great aliens without those errors. It's also sad that they didn't even bother to do somehing about it.
Mrs Paris
Captain
without the short lifespan, the ocampans are nothing more than any other ailens with funny ears and mental powers, like Vulcans, or Vorta. The 9-year thing was the only thing that made Ocampans iteresting
Mrs Paris
Captain
well since Kes said she had an uncle, it's obvious that they can have more than one child
^
Could be a half-uncle.
Could be a half-uncle.
Mrs Paris
Captain
her father also said she was his favorite daughter
it's possible that multiple births are extrememly common, or that the one birth thing was done by the caretaker to controll them
On the contrary, the silly life-span is what ruined the species. Common sense says that a species with such a short lifespan can't develope to anything more than a primate.
The Ocampa on Suspiria's array were something more though. They had developed into something very interesting, a species which could be compared with interesting species like Vulcans and Vorta.
Mrs Paris
Captain
the ocampans seemed to be more than primates to me
Without the short lifespan they are no different than other species with funny ears and mental powers. Lots of people have those, and lots of people have a will to exploreand learn (like everyone in Starfleet)
Without the short lifespan, the Ocampa are much better and more interesting than other species with mental powers. Some species have that as well, but so what? The Ocampa would still be better. Fortunately we did have that on Suspiria's array.
Common sense also says spaceships don't make noise in outer space but there you go...
I personally didn't have a problem with the short lifespan. While nine years seems like a short time to us the fact that this would be a full life to an Ocampan is what makes it interesting. What would have been even more interesting is if the writers had taken advantage of the opportunity Kes provided to explore the issues surrounding aging. Oh well...
As for the "only one child" plot all I can say is how stupid was that?
Mrs Paris
Captain
ok, then please explain to me how an alien with pointy ears and mental powers and a long lifespan would be different and better than lets say a Vulcan.......
Mrs Paris
Captain
That was one of the big missed oportunities with the character. There could have been some fantastic drama with her aging and getting upset that nobody else was aging around her
ok, then please explain to me how an alien with pointy ears and mental powers and a long lifespan would be different and better than lets say a Vulcan.......
Ocampans have emotions!!!
...okay, guess not.
Sorry, I must disagree here. I see no reason of exploring aging and death, maybe if the series had been set in a period of 100-200 years and the scenario would have included all characters, but not for one, single character.
I do think there are enough of tear-filled soap operas on TV which covers such scenarios.
As for Kes, the silly lifespan was the only obstacle for making the character one of Star Trek's best characters of all times.
The nine-year lifespan was a mistake which not even the writers and producers were interested in. They should have prolonged the lifespan by using the possibilities mentioned in "Cold Fire" and I'm sure that they actually were planning to do that too.
I loved it for the characters, every single one of them, including Kes. True, I could have done with less Seven and less EMH, but I still like them as characters. Some of the episodes are clunkers and the finale was a huge disappointment to me, but overall, yep... the characters kept me hanging in there 'til the bitter end. I cared about them and cared about what happened to them. Still do 
Mrs Paris
Captain
yeah, aging and death would have been wonderfuly dramatic and character building scenes. It's a good thing they didn't do it because Jennifer Lien was too weak of an actress to be able to handle such an intense scene
Similar threads
