It might even be that "Ambassador to Federation" and "Federation Council Member" are one and the same thing. Although in "Rapture", it's implied that Bajor would get several Council Members if it joined the UFP, whereas Sarek doesn't appear to share his ambassadorship with anybody else. Regarding the original comments on Axanar, some RPG material suggests that Axanar was the focus of a conflict that threatened to tear the Federation apart, as some members wanted to sue for separate peace with the Klingons. John M. Ford's novel Final Reflection features such a secession crisis as well. Apparently, an outcome was reached where the UFP and Starfleet would stay unified, or at least Vulcan wouldn't secede. I also sort of like Margaret Wander Bonnano's take on it in Strangers from the Sky: that the "Vulcanian expedition" that was name-dropped in "Court Martial" was a Starfleet show of force intended to coerce Vulcan into joining the Starfleet defense effort. And that Vulcan responded by sending the Intrepid and nothing else... Outside the novel and RPG worlds, though, the role of Vulcan in the UFP and Starfleet remains quite unclear. +1. Thumbs up. Ditto. Amen. Timo Saloniemi
I don't recall there ever being any on-screen (i.e. canonical) reference or clarification that legitimizes the (trivial) point of Spock being the first Vulcan in Starfleet. It's a fun little tidbit to wonder about, but I don't know that I'd subscribe to it entirely. What we do have on-screen (i.e. canon) confirmation of is a ship crewed mostly by Vulcans (Intrepid) and (though produced later) the undeniable fact that T'Pol served in Starfleet for at least seven years. So either way, it doesn't hold much water for me.
Maybe he was both the "Vulcan Ambassador" and "Federation Ambassador", just at different times in his career.
To be sure, we only know that she served in Starfleet for one year - the fourth season of ENT. Since her rank progression seems to have completely stagnated for the unseen years between "Terra Prime" and "These Are the Voyages", we might just as well assume that she resigned for that duration - perhaps rejoining the Vulcan navy in order to fight for her native world in the Romulan War. Of course, everybody else seems to have stagnated, too, some at relatively low ranks, which is much worse for them than the getting stuck at Commander for the long-lived T'Pol or getting stuck at the already high and prestigious Captain for Archer... Only a select few of our ENT heroes are explicitly said to have been serving through the intervening years. OTOH, it's also undeniable that T'Pol's Starfleet wasn't the same as Spock's. The stars are probably full of Starfleets of all sorts; the UFP one might well be an exclusive Homo sapiens only club for all we know, not accepting any Vulcans as members before the 2260s because the high-ranking veterans of the Romulan War knew that one couldn't trust anybody with green blood and pointy ears... But since Kirk indeed calls the Vulcan-crewed starship "USS" Intrepid, we'd have to go to quite a bit of trouble to make it plausible that Spock would have been the first Vulcan in the UFP organization. And ENT plays little or no role in that; the idea of Spock as the first has always been highly dubious for Trek fans. Timo Saloniemi
It has been a while since I've seen the Immunity Syndrome, but are we sure the Intrepid was a Starfleet vessel? Well, if Kirk does name it the USS Intrepid it seems likely it was Starfleet, but I'll watch it again just to refresh my memory.
Meh. I'm going with the least difficult interpretation on this (mainly because I find this entire argument somewhat ridiculous) and just stick to my very simple understanding that Archer's Starfleet is the same Starfleet we've always known, just a bit smaller. Likewise, the last time we see T'Pol in "Terra Prime" she's a commander with the Starfleet patches and insignia... and is seen wearing same throughout "These Are The Voyages..." Anything else, really, is extrapolation. I realize a bunch of you are going to disagree with me, and that's fine, but this is how I've always interpreted this issue, and I'm fine with it.
The Intrepid is referred to frequently throughout the episode as just "The Intrepid," except on a single occasion, during a Captain Log, Kirk refers to the ship as the "USS Intrepid." This is half way through the episode after both Spock and McCoy volunteer to pilot the shuttlecraft. i guess it's possible that Kirk simply misspoke. Omitting that single "USS" would make the argument that Spock is somehow the first Vulcan in the 23 century Starfleet slightly easier to swallow. If the Intrepid were a ship in the Vulcan Defense Forces, instead of Starfleet.
I've been a long trek fan and used to watch it as a kid back when Dinosaurs ruled the Earth :P I've never heard anyone, with the exception of outside sources and fan magazines refering to Spock as the First Vulcan in Starfleet. I've always thought that comment was silly myself and in the episode with the Intrepid I doubt Kirk 'misspoke' into his offical log. The Enterprise was often refered to casually as 'The Enterprise' and most likely that same casual term was used for the USS Intrepid when they spoke of her in the episode. I believe other Vulcans preceeded Spock into the Academy.
It could be that Spock was the first Vulcan starfleet acadamny graduate to serve on a ship that was not exclusively manned by Vulcans. It is also possible that early Starfleet officers were like T'Pol (or Kira) and were drafted into Starfleet based on experience with their native institutions rather than Starfleet Acadamy training.
Spock's joining Starfleet was considered a family tragedy, but this doesn't necessarily mean it was a planetwide scandal as well. Many a Vulcan family (including prominent ones like Sarek's) may have had their sons and daughters elope to the wild side for one logical reason or another. It doesn't necessarily call for half-human blood... Spock may have been the first in many ways: the first Vulcan-human hybrid in Starfleet, possibly the first Vulcan-human hybrid to reach adulthood anywhere, and possibly the first Vulcan national to serve aboard a UFP Starfleet ship crewed by non-Vulcans. These specific "firsts" never seemed to play much of a role in Spock's life, though. He was legend among his own for some reason ("Amok Time"), but I rather doubt the Vulcans would appreciate and idolize such technicalities as the "firsts" listed above. Vulcans sound like meritocrats for the most part: perhaps Spock was legend because of his competent naval career and his rapid rise through the ranks, combined with notable scientific work conducted on the side - all this happening outside Vulcan, in the barbaric hinterlands of the galaxy, despite the adversity imposed by the exile. The same feats within the Vulcan civilization might not be quite as legendary. Or then the skyrocketing rank development would be impossible in the Vulcan navy, where everybody can expect to live for several centuries and getting from Sub-Lieutenant to Sub-Commander may well take a full century. Timo Saloniemi
i have it in my mind that Spock was the first Vulcan to graduate from Starfleet Academy. And so that's the confusion with being the first in Starfleet itself. The Intrepid, based on crew size, sounds like a sister ship to Enterprise. But perhaps, like T'Pol, the crew were trained on Vulcan but then commission through Starfleet, with some training through Starfleet Acadmy. Perhpas Spock made it "cool" to go through the entire Starfleet Academy process. But the TNG era, Vulcans had grew to full acceptance of Starfleet as an option. Some cultures need lots of time ot change...
Hello everyone, This thread has grown a bit faster than I expected. T’Girl: I realise that “old fanzines” is as much information as you probably have, but I’d be interested to know if you can remember any more, since I did check at some length back through my own Star Trek reference works for anything about Spock’s career I could find. I looked through all five issues of Spockanalia (very interesting, but no mention of Spock as the first Vulcan in Starfleet). The Making of Star Trek has nothing about Spock being the first Vulcan in Starfleet. He’s the only Vulcan on the Enterprise, though. The Intrepid gives every indication of being a sister-ship to the Enterprise, and is usually listed as such. There’s no absolute data, but the ship is referred to as the USS Intrepid, and as a starship (which seems to have had a more particular meaning to start off with: a ship exactly like the Enterprise). The crew is pretty much the same size as the Enterprise’s. It’s not conclusive, but The Making of Star Trek lists the Intrepid as one of the twelve starships like the Enterprise, and the Star Fleet Technical Manual (OK, it’s certainly not proof, but…) and the Star Trek Encyclopaedia both list the Intrepid as a Constitution-class Starfleet ship. I personally find something a bit worrying about all the Vulcan Starfleet officers being sent off in their own separate ship, but it seems to be what happens, at least until they get eaten by a space amoeba. It might be significant that Spock often has moral problems with the way his human colleagues act in relation to other life forms, especially towards the Salt Vampire and the Horta. My point (if there really was one) is that the people who say Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet aren’t mistaking “fanon” for “canon”. Certainly the reason it’s in the Star Trek Encyclopaedia, The Official Star Trek Fact Files and the biography at www.startrek.com is because it’s supposed to be established on screen, and specifically in “Whom Gods Destroy”. If you don’t believe me, look at the Star Trek Chronology, pages 42 to 44, particularly the comments in italics running from the bottom of page 43 onto page 44. I have to admit that “Whom Gods Destroy” is one of the stories where I follow the acting rather than the plot (especially when Yvonne Craig’s on screen). Even so, I find the argument that the Battle of Axanar was followed immediately by a peace mission that Cadet Kirk went on and that mission led directly to a change in Starfleet Academy recruitment policy not at all self-evident. My own casual assumption was that the Battle of Axanar occurred before Cadet Kirk had joined the Academy, where he tells us it was studied in detail. The peace mission came later, and could well be one of a whole number of peace missions trying to clear up the aftermath of whatever the Battle of Axanar was about. As I said in my first post, I think the dialogue is a more general point about “peace vs. war”, not that a peace mission Cadet Kirk goes on specifically leads to Spock being able to enter the Academy. There are no specific dates in the show, and it is not explicitly stated anywhere that Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet. The closest I could get was quoted in my original post. If anyone knows of a more detailed analysis of the “Spock was first” interpretation of “Whom Gods Destroy”, then I’d be really interested in tracking it down. The reasoning seems pretty weak to me, but I’d like to suspend any final judgement (not that such a decision would apply to anyone but me, of course) until I’ve seen the full details. In the meantime, I hope that I’ve managed to waft away a little of the fog surrounding this statement and its origins, even if there’s no definite “yes or no” answer. (As usual!) Timon
Regarding the early history of the "Spock's First" assumption, D.C. Fontana herself insisted that he wasn't the first or only one, in her pre-TOS novel Vulcan's Glory. Even though the book is from the late eighties, we could argue that there's a continuum of thought for Ms. Fontana that makes the novel relevant even for the early concepts on Spock's personal history and status. And even that she's a Spock expert of sorts for the actual TOS production era. The Okudas probably were aware of this, but may have been influenced by the fanon take of Spock as the literal first when doing their Chronology rationalization. Timo Saloniemi
The way I see it, Federation Councillors are elected, directly or indirectly, by the people and represent the people, independently of their respective planetary governments. Like how US Senators represent the people of the states, not the governments of states (meaning they don't take orders from state governments). OTOH, member state ambassadors represent the planetary governments in their dealings with the Federation government. They're probably called ambassadors for largely symbolic reasons, as a relic of the Federation's development from an alliance of indepedent worlds to a true federated state.
^ Ambassador as a symbolic and possibly archaic term? I'm OK with that. As for the Federation Council, each member world chooses its own Councillor as it sees fit. For example: Bajor's Councillor is appointed by the First Minister and ratified by the Chamber of Ministers; Andor chooses its councillor by whatever party holds majority in the parliament; Betazed (and possibly Earth) chooses theirs by direct popular election. So whether or not the Councillor truly represents the people, could be a bit variable.
But that's just gibberish from the latest round of novels, and not backed up by anything on the actually show. Interesting conjecture - nothing more. I have to admit (opinion time), the idea advanced by some that the federation has just a "upper house" called the council and not a second "lower house" like a general assembly or a some such, well it's seems odd. Maybe they do have one and it just isn't mentioned.. It usually is the lower house that has the power to remove the president, when necessary. (end opinion time).
Going by canon, very little is known about the Federation government; all we have is conjecture and numerous attempts at rationalization. That's what we Trekkers do, we spend hours debating over a single sentence from an otherwise forgettable episode.