Question RE Reg Barclay

[hux]

In the Pathfinder episode, the doctor says "this Barclay fellow certainly has an interesting medical history" or words to that effect and talks about him as though he has only just learnt of his existence (as do the other characters)

but in the season 2 episode, Projections, the doctor meets Barclay; so what gives?

 

[od0_ital]

That wasn't the real Barcley in 'Projections'.

It was really Dwight Shultz, though.

 

[Lord Manitou]

The doctor was in a dream world at the time and was wandering around delusional.
Nobody want'd to know Barkley until 'Inside Man' in Season 7 when he convinced the crew he could get them home using a red giant star nearby. Most of the crew weren't convinced of his sanity.

 

[exodus]

Is it normal to ask for someones medical history upon first meeting them?
Sounds like a Pimp scouting for his next 'Ho.


"Hey girl, you lookin' good................now show me yo papers!"

 

[Chris3123]

That wasn't the real Barcley in 'Projections'.

But the Doctor still knew of Broccoli's existence, didn't he? I seem to recall him being told that there really was such a person at Jupiter Station who assisted Zimmerman.

 

[exodus]

That wasn't the real Barcley in 'Projections'.

But the Doctor still knew of Broccoli's existence, didn't he? I seem to recall him being told that there really was such a person at Jupiter Station who assisted Zimmerman.

Yes but going by the example the OP gives, it's one thing to be aware of someones existance but completely another to know intimate details about them.

For example: I'm aware you exist, however I don't know intimate details of your life, personality traits or medical history. We're aware of actors but we don't know them personally no matter what we read online or in the tabloids. We've learned from Geordi and his mistakes with Leia Brahmas that ones holo-profile isn't exact to the real person.

 

[T.D. Possum]

My question is: Why is the EMH blabbing about another person's medical history?

 

[od0_ital]

Because part of his character evolution was to be the ship's gossip.

 

[hux]

That wasn't the real Barcley in 'Projections'.

but it had his name and looked like him so the doctor was aware of a man called barclay who looked like that so when they discoverd his existence after pathfinder, why didn't the doctor say, "oh wait, i've met this guy before"

Yes but going by the example the OP gives, it's one thing to be aware of someones existance but completely another to know intimate details about them.

i'm not saying anything about the doctor knowing intimate details but simply acknowledging that he has met a man called barclay who looked like barclay before - after he came to be aware of Barclay after pathfinder, he should have remembered already meeting before, the name, the face, but the whole thing is treated like the doctor has never met this guy before when he clearly has

 

[od0_ital]

^

The Doctor also had that cascade failure thing in 'The Swarm' - maybe his memory of the Barcley incident was lost in the process.

 

[hux]

^

The Doctor also had that cascade failure thing in 'The Swarm' - maybe his memory of the Barcley incident was lost in the process.

finally, an explanation - some fans seem determined to believe that star trek writers aren't capable of making errors (not sure why) - i'm fairly certain it was just a mistake but could be explained by various theories if necessary but ultimately, it simply appears that they forget the doctor had met barclay before (just like they forgot about the borg baby that was never mentioned again)

 

[od0_ital]

The Borg Baby can also be explained away via cascade failure, only it would also involve a dishwasher...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Not surprised they 'forgot' the Borg baby. It is, after all, a BABY. So there's no story ideas possible with it. The only things that could have happened are: either it died, they found its homeworld, or some crewmembers adopted it. Any of those three works.

 

[Lord Manitou]

Hux is correct for making the enquiry but the writers are not wrong.
The doctor really didn't care about the crew- but just making with facts, data and to carry-out his profession. He was severely critisized for owning a lousy beside manner and the crew was against having a holographic porjection for a doctor.
He probably knew Barclay, but did not care to expand anymore knowledge of him.
The doctor continued to gain precedence because of his mobil emitter and finally, in season 6 and 7, he was recognized as a person.

 

[hux]

^ Not surprised they 'forgot' the Borg baby. It is, after all, a BABY.

that's presumably why they also forgot about samantha wildman's dead version of Naomi (both babies are probably in a drawer somewhere or maybe Neelix made a tangy baby flan)

 

[od0_ital]

^

Just how many stories did ya expect 'em to have that featured a baby's corpse?

It was already established that sickbay had a nearby morgue.

 

[exodus]

^

The Doctor also had that cascade failure thing in 'The Swarm' - maybe his memory of the Barcley incident was lost in the process.

finally, an explanation - some fans seem determined to believe that star trek writers aren't capable of making errors (not sure why)

..because you never bothered to ask.

I was never under the impression from the ep. & the example you gave that the Doctor didn't know Barclay but rather, he wasn't familar with him on a very personal level. Not one again going by the example, that he required personal medical details on the man. It has nothing to do with the writers and not capable of making mistakes. I don't see in this case where any real mistake was made, epeciaklly since we've seen that for a computer the EMH's memory isn't 100%. He did state clearly that he never had Kes or Neelix in medical data base because he forgot to ask them.