Q and the Gray

[Gary7]

Even at maximum speeds, it would take seventy five years to reach the Federation, but I'm not willing to settle for that. There's another entity like the Caretaker out there somewhere who has the ability to get us there a lot faster. We'll be looking for her, and we'll be looking for wormholes, spatial rifts, or new technologies to help us.

Now I'm no Janeway basher, but that "we're not looking for a quick fix" is almost indefensibly stupid.

Very true. After all, couldn't they look at Q as a kind of "Caretaker"? I mean... seriously. This is where the writing failed so miserably. Q should always have used the gift of return as a tease, never being serious to honor it even after Janeway accepted.

 

[Guy Gardener]

What were were seeing in "The Q and the Grey" was an interface. When you use your computer, you're not really clicking icons, you're affecting currents and circuits and microchips which you (well, most people) have no comprehension of and could never manipulate without the software to do it. It's the same in the Q Continuum here. Whether you see a gun or finger lighting is irrelevant. The Voyager crew were given the ability to operate on the Q's level with an interface which percieved the Q's supernova-causing superweapons as muskets.

In Foundation Asimov called it "mummery" which is usually a word that means over the top religious ceremony.

Rifles by the way.

It would have been cool to see Kim handling a muzzle loading weapon. Loading the ball and then spitting down the barrel. Completely different ways of going to war. I mean, could you imagine Richard Sharpe with a minigun?

 

[The Dominion]

What were were seeing in "The Q and the Grey" was an interface. When you use your computer, you're not really clicking icons, you're affecting currents and circuits and microchips which you (well, most people) have no comprehension of and could never manipulate without the software to do it. It's the same in the Q Continuum here. Whether you see a gun or finger lighting is irrelevant. The Voyager crew were given the ability to operate on the Q's level with an interface which percieved the Q's supernova-causing superweapons as muskets.

Even still, if they would have used finger lightning it stands to reason that the Voyager crew might not have been able to steal weapons and turn the tide. What could they have done, cut Q's finger off? The Q don't need weapons that are separate from them, they are weapons.

 

[exodus]

What were were seeing in "The Q and the Grey" was an interface. When you use your computer, you're not really clicking icons, you're affecting currents and circuits and microchips which you (well, most people) have no comprehension of and could never manipulate without the software to do it. It's the same in the Q Continuum here. Whether you see a gun or finger lighting is irrelevant. The Voyager crew were given the ability to operate on the Q's level with an interface which percieved the Q's supernova-causing superweapons as muskets.

Exactly.
Q repeatedly states not to take what you see regarding them as literal.

 

[exodus]

What were were seeing in "The Q and the Grey" was an interface. When you use your computer, you're not really clicking icons, you're affecting currents and circuits and microchips which you (well, most people) have no comprehension of and could never manipulate without the software to do it. It's the same in the Q Continuum here. Whether you see a gun or finger lighting is irrelevant. The Voyager crew were given the ability to operate on the Q's level with an interface which percieved the Q's supernova-causing superweapons as muskets.

Even still, if they would have used finger lightning it stands to reason that the Voyager crew might not have been able to steal weapons and turn the tide. What could they have done, cut Q's finger off? The Q don't need weapons that are separate from them, they are weapons.

Too other beings not to themselves.
I believe Q said in "Deathwish" that Q can't harm other Q, much like Havok & Cyclops of X-Men can harm each other with their powers. They would have to use another type of weapon to hurt each other.

 

[F. King Daniel]

What were were seeing in "The Q and the Grey" was an interface. When you use your computer, you're not really clicking icons, you're affecting currents and circuits and microchips which you (well, most people) have no comprehension of and could never manipulate without the software to do it. It's the same in the Q Continuum here. Whether you see a gun or finger lighting is irrelevant. The Voyager crew were given the ability to operate on the Q's level with an interface which percieved the Q's supernova-causing superweapons as muskets.

Even still, if they would have used finger lightning it stands to reason that the Voyager crew might not have been able to steal weapons and turn the tide. What could they have done, cut Q's finger off? The Q don't need weapons that are separate from them, they are weapons.

Remember how Riker was given Q powers once? Taking a gun could have represented stripping those Q of their "lighting bolt" powers.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

So...
- Riker was given Q powers yet he was a human.
- Amanda had latent Q powers that slowly manifested themselves, even though she was feeling and thinking just like a human.

Yet Voyager's crew had to be given MUSKETS because their minds couldn't comprehend these powers?

Not that I mind it – continuity has never been the main concern of Star Trek writers, but you have to go out of your way to claim that these random stories fit naturally with each other, when the only thing they have in common is Q's omnipotence and personality.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I imagine that the continuum is a swirling storm of atypical colours, energy and chemicals, probably without gravity and an atmospheric pressure that is either absolute or nonexistent, and then there's sound and heat to consider.

Forget going insane, or exploding, Janeway shouldn't be able to walk in a straight line with out being allotted a golden spine version of their homefront.

 

[Saxman1]

I didn't care for Q on Voyager or DS9. He was great on DS9. On Voyager he came across as some horny, sexist pig. The only good thing about The Q and the Grey was the always scrupmtious Suzi Plakson!

 

[The Dominion]

It's funny how Q got the whole continuum to cooperate with his bizarre analogy during wartime, all for the benefit of some humans.

 

[Sandoval]

It's funny how Q got the whole continuum to cooperate with his bizarre analogy during wartime, all for the benefit of some humans.

He's a persuasive guy.

 

[The Dominion]

And yet he couldn't get Janeway...

 

[Guy Gardener]

Q is always seeing the future and the past at the same time as he is seeing the present. He couldn't get it on with his girlfriend and have his child he already knew very well and loved enough, without failing to get kathy to undress and present her fanny. Sexing up Janeway would have dissolved his child rupturing the integrity of the timeline and destroying the continuum.

Going through the motions.

WE'VE ALL BEEN THE SCARECROW!

(Seriously. Read Watchmen.)

 

[Sandoval]

And yet he couldn't get Janeway...

He didn't really want her. If he'd wanted her he'd have got her.

 

[Sandoval]

(Seriously. Read Watchmen.)

I'd rather watch Readmen.

 

[exodus]

So...
- Riker was given Q powers yet he was a human.
- Amanda had latent Q powers that slowly manifested themselves, even though she was feeling and thinking just like a human.

Yet Voyager's crew had to be given MUSKETS because their minds couldn't comprehend these powers?

Not that I mind it – continuity has never been the main concern of Star Trek writers, but you have to go out of your way to claim that these random stories fit naturally with each other, when the only thing they have in common is Q's omnipotence and personality.

......just like the Bible and the explanation "God works in mysterious ways?"
Be it Mythology or the God many believe in, the ways of Gods have ALWAYS meant to be beyond our understanding. Nowhere in our literature do a God's actions make logical sense. Why should the Q who represent God's in the Trekverse be any different? Why is it when it's done in Mythology it makes for a great tale but when a fiction based show like Trek does it, it's flawed continuity?
Seriously, what's the difference?

 

[Tiberius]

That's not the plot hole. The plot hole is that this whole episode hinges on the Q having never reproduced before, when the whole plot of TNG's "True Q" is that Amanda Rodgers' parents were both Q!

Ah, but Amanda's parents did it as Humans, not as Q, so it doesn't count! You can't disagree with me! Lalalalalalala!!!

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Why is it when it's done in Mythology it makes for a great tale but when a fiction based show like Trek does it, it's flawed continuity?
Seriously, what's the difference?

The bible features scenes of incest, bestiality, violent sex, BDSM, and comes with a Parental Advisory warning. Star Trek does not. It's obvious that the former is a great tale, and the latter is just just boring. If Star Trek really wanted to be a great tale and true with the tradition of the Mythology, then Q junior would be female Q's father and Janeway would get dirty with the dog.

 

[exodus]

Why is it when it's done in Mythology it makes for a great tale but when a fiction based show like Trek does it, it's flawed continuity?
Seriously, what's the difference?

The bible features scenes of incest, bestiality, violent sex, BDSM, and comes with a Parental Advisory warning. Star Trek does not. It's obvious that the former is a great tale, and the latter is just just boring. If Star Trek really wanted to be a great tale and true with the tradition of the Mythology, then Q junior would be female Q's father and Janeway would get dirty with the dog.

Seriously, how do you go from God working in mysterious ways to bestiality and BDSM?
The latter is boring?
I have absolutely no doubt more people fall asleep during church than than do any Trek episode.

 

[Sandoval]

The bible features scenes of incest, bestiality, violent sex, BDSM, and comes with a Parental Advisory warning. Star Trek does not.

Hence why Star Trek is uncool and hasn't been produced by a television company for the better part of ten years.

Now if Star Trek featured incest, bestiality, violent sex, GNDN and had a Parental Advisory warning it wouldn't currently be off the air.

Silly producers.