Burning Dreams

[JonnyQuest037]

Personally, I think Number One is a character that works best when she's a mystery. If her entire past and real name were revealed, she wouldn't be as appealing.

I'd love for some enterprising Trek author to prove me wrong, however.

 

[Elemental]

^According to Vulcan's Glory, "Number One" is her real name.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Elemental said:
^According to Vulcan's Glory, "Number One" is her real name.

Yep, that's my personal favorite backstory for her. I also like Peter David's explanation that her real name is unpronouncable by most humans.

 

[garamet]

Are you guys beginning to see why I didn't want to tackle this particular subject?

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Oh, sure. I probably would have made the same decision in your shoes, Margaret.

If "Number One" is her real name, can you imagine how confusing that must have been when she was an ensign?

 

[Ronald Held]

I agree, leave it alone.

 

[Therin of Andor]

JonnyQuest037 said:
Personally, I think Number One is a character that works best when she's a mystery. If her entire past and real name were revealed, she wouldn't be as appealing.

I agree! And I think that was GR's original intention, to keep her enigmatic, otherwise he'd have named her in the Writers' Bible, even if the name wasn't going to be revealed straight away (kinda like the VOY Writers' Bible mentioned that the EMH would eventually choose his name as Dr Zimmerman).

In my own "The Menagerie" fanfic sequel, I once called Number One "Admiral Certaine" (as in "the one") - and had fun making her life and career very mysterious.

Margaret WB/garamet and Marco: I finished "Burning Dreams" today. Thank you! Several times I had to put the book down and clear my vision. That sequence in the French pastry shop was beautifully done (and Yay! an Andorian cameo); and Pike's Argelian lover was well done too - barely described, but so perfectly etched onto my mind's eye.

As I raced towards the end, I felt like I was running out of pages, with no time for a big ending, but you timed it all well and I was left feeling sad, thoughtful, uplifted and very satisfied. Wonderful!

 

[Therin of Andor]

blsisko said:
... most of the books (and Ms. Nichols) have given her the name of "Nyota", which is as close to a canon name as we're ever going to get

William Rotsler coined "Nyota" for "Star Trek II Biographies" and he ran it past Nichelle first, who liked the idea. (Even though she'd already approved "Penda" for fans of the LA ST convention circuit, who were writing ST fanfic.) then Janet Kagan used "Nyota" in "Uhura's Song" and it caught on.

In the 40th-anniversary-of-TOS reprint of "Vulcan's Glory", DC Fontana tells how Majel Barrett had come up with a colony world/home planet (Ilyria) for "Number One", plus a backstory, which Majel herself used when getting into character as Number One for "The Cage". And Majel preferred that Number One called herself "Number One".

Good enough for me!

 

[vanguarduk]

just finished, excellent. always wanted to know more about captain pike. should do more on individual characters.

 

[Enterpriserules]

This was a great backstory, be where were the mentions of the Enterprice crew and Archer. I would have thought that Pike would have grown up reading all about the Enterprise and Columbia crews as a kid. WHy are they no where in the book?

 

[Christopher]

^^Just because something is part of history doesn't mean it has to be featured in every subsequent novel. Maybe Pike just wasn't a history buff the way Kirk and Picard are. How many present-day stories do you read where the heroes spend a lot of time thinking or talking about Miles Standish and Daniel Boone?

 

[Enterpriserules]

That is hardly a good comparison since they are much farther that the around 80 years of Enterprise from Pike. Plus as a young boy the stories of Archer would be those of Legand by then and would have been household names. Like those of Churchill, Roosevelt and even Washington.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, well the same question applies: do you hear Churchill, Roosevelt and Washington brought up routinely in every single present-day story?

I think there's far too much of a tendency among ST fans to assume that everyone in the ST universe is just as familiar and concerned with the adventures of Kirk, Archer, Picard, etc. as we fans are. But to them, these would just be parts of a much bigger, more complex universe, and they wouldn't dominate everyone's attention to an equal degree.

Particularly since we're talking about captains, not world leaders. If you ask your average person in the 23rd or 24th century to name three famous people from the 22nd century, they're more likely to be people like the President of United Earth and the head of the Vulcan High Council and the inventor of the transporter. Sure, Archer would be pretty high on the list, since he'd be famous in the way Neil Armstrong or Magellan is famous, but it doesn't make sense to assume that everyone in the Federation would be thinking about Jonathan Archer on a regular basis. When was the last time (before now) that you had a conversation in which Neil Armstrong was mentioned?

 

[Elemental]

Christopher said:
Yeah, well the same question applies: do you hear Churchill, Roosevelt and Washington brought up routinely in every single present-day story?

I think there's far too much of a tendency among ST fans to assume that everyone in the ST universe is just as familiar and concerned with the adventures of Kirk, Archer, Picard, etc. as we fans are. But to them, these would just be parts of a much bigger, more complex universe, and they wouldn't dominate everyone's attention to an equal degree.

I agree. I think the tendency is already too high to try to squeeze in other famous ST characters into too many novels. For example, Picard appears way too frequently, IMO. It wears off the effect that makes it a special event.

Particularly since we're talking about captains, not world leaders. If you ask your average person in the 23rd or 24th century to name three famous people from the 22nd century, they're more likely to be people like the President of United Earth and the head of the Vulcan High Council and the inventor of the transporter. Sure, Archer would be pretty high on the list, since he'd be famous in the way Neil Armstrong or Magellan is famous, but it doesn't make sense to assume that everyone in the Federation would be thinking about Jonathan Archer on a regular basis. When was the last time (before now) that you had a conversation in which Neil Armstrong was mentioned?

I'd have to say Archer would probably be a bit more famous than that since he did, y'know, save the planet and all.

 

[Christopher]

Elemental said:
I'd have to say Archer would probably be a bit more famous than that since he did, y'know, save the planet and all.

I don't know... I think that people don't always remember the names of the people who prevent such things as well as they remember the names of their perpetrators if they succeed. We remember that Osama bin Laden ordered the 9/11 attack, but do we know the names of the people who've headed off subsequent al-Qaida plans to attack the United States? No, because those plans were thwarted and thus never became all that prominent in the public eye.

 

[Enterpriserules]

I am sorry but I think that that is preposterous. Pike is a human and therefore would know human history. Archer was one of the most important humans in that history. He is up there with Cochrane, MacAruthor, Washington, Julius Caesar, and so many others. He is was the first captain of a deep space Starfleet ship. He saved not only Earth, but Vulcan and many other world from the Expanse. He was instrumental in the Romulan wars. He is also a key in the forming of the Federation of Planets. All of this a mere 80 years before Pike. Everyone in TNG knew about Kirk and the way his crew had saved the universe, I do not think that it is a stretch to say that Pike would have looked up to Archer and his crew. Plus Charlie, was in Starfleet, I am sure that he may even have know Archer. In LFM Trip meets Kirk as a young boy, so I don't think that I am being unlogical here. I am not saying that it had to be all over the book, but I do think that it would have had some mentions in the life of young Pike.

 

[JD]

Personally, I agree with Chris and Elemental, just because Archer was an important historical figure dosen't mean every character after him had to be interested in him. I'm a young person today (18), and I'm not really that interested in people like Neil Armstrong or Alan Shephard.

 

[Enterpriserules]

That is too bad, one of the greatest ways to grow as a person is by studying great people of the past! Plus you really did not engage my argument.

 

[blakbyrd]

While I somewhat agree. What I think they're saying is, that even if they were known, it wasn't mandatory to put references to these great figures every time a story/book is written. If it had something to do with the overall story, then yes, I'd agree.

 

[Enterpriserules]

I understand. It would have been nice to see some mention of them and I think that it makes more sense that there would be more than there not being one.