Spoilers How do you like it that Picard is an android now?

[fireproof78]

That scenario, I think, has historically spawned optimistic entertainment, escapism, or messages of strength, such as superheros in response to world wars. Who wants to go to a theater for more of the same?

Historically, perhaps, but this is a pervasive, societal wide, depression and anxiety episode, manifesting across two generations. There's been no reprieve, not in the same sense as in society.

Going to the theater for more of the same makes sense because there is an end. It's similar to (but not identical) about the adage about stories not saying that dragons exist but that they can be defeated. As much noise is made about the grimness of contemporary art there is still the quiet resolution that no matter what people will continue on and will rise to the challenges.

Escapism, if it is to have any value, must have a sense of resolution and accomplishment. Otherwise, it would be like a fairly tale, happily ever after, with no meaningful impact upon the the world.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Trekcore made an excellent point about this. During "Star Gazer" Picard looked to Seven for confirmation that it was a Borg ship and I thought, "can't he hear them??" but as they pointed out...

Cloned body. No residual Borg implant. No voice of the Collective.

And I was like, "Ohhhhhhhh."

 

[PatB1974]

Honestly I am okay with Picard's new body. I mean it is Star Trek after all so, transference of consciousness isn't unheard of. Turnabout Intruder springs to mind.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Also, y'know, Spock.

 

[NCC-73515]

To add: If he was the same Picard, why the big grief when he died when the characters knew they were going to bring him back moments later? Answer: Writers' manipulation of the audience that doesn't make sense in the actual fiction unless he was truly dead.

what makes you think they knew?

 

[Sci]

Picard is dead.

Nope. Jean-Luc Picard is alive. His consciousness was transferred from the body he was born with to a new body, same as Spock in Star Trek III.

It leaves any threat without tension and me devoid of all interest in any further outcome. Sarcastic "congrat's" to the writers for this particular take on deconstruction and the continued trashing of cultural heros.

Deconstructionism is not trashing -- it just means taking something apart to see a deeper truth underneath it. Deconstructionism can, in fact, be loving and affirming of the thing it's deconstructing. DS9 was deconstructionist of TNG. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was deconstructionist of the character of James T. Kirk. PIC S1 was deconstructionist of Jean-Luc Picard. And all three affirmed the value of and love for the subjects of their deconstruction.

And just for the sake of giving Dukhat more grist for the mill, without the challenging math, I think transporters make copies.

And you accuse modern writers of being nihilistic?

deconstructionist writers whose interest is only to put their personal mark on a franchise like a dog to a tree to the detriment of a franchise.

Adding more depth and complexity to the franchise than it had before is not to its detriment.

The people complaining are barking up the wrong tree. You want something? I'll give you something. Something you might even have me on your side for: What was the point killing Picard off at the end of Season 1 anyway?

The point was to have Picard come to terms with his own mortality and the mortality of everyone he loves, and then reward him with new life. A sci-fi version of death and resurrection as regeneration, with a dash of Orpheus descending into the Underworld.

As mentioned, something has spawned an unfortunate generation of destructive, deconstructive, nihilistic writers with penchants for death and a certain, somewhat ironic self-righteous ego to justify it.

PIC S1 is absolutely not nihilistic. It may be existentialist, but it roundly rejects nihilism.

That scenario, I think, has historically spawned optimistic entertainment, escapism, or messages of strength, such as superheros in response to world wars. Who wants to go to a theater for more of the same?

Historically, difficult times have produced both works of escapism and works of deconstructionism, and neither response is more valid than the other. Star Trek has itself also always been about both -- episodes like "The Trouble with Tribbles" or "A Piece of the Action" are clearly just escapism, and episodes like "The City on the Edge of Forever," "A Private Little War," "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield," etc., are clearly episodes responding to and trying to deconstruct the political situations that existed at the time of their production.

Trekcore made an excellent point about this. During "Star Gazer" Picard looked to Seven for confirmation that it was a Borg ship and I thought, "can't he hear them??" but as they pointed out...

Cloned body. No residual Borg implant. No voice of the Collective.

And I was like, "Ohhhhhhhh."

That's a really good point! I wonder if the fact that this was a new brain is also why he was able to handle seeing the Borg again without having a PTSD response? If his current brain doesn't have those triggers wired into it, he might be able to respond to certain stimuli, like encounter the Borg again, without falling into those old trauma spirals. Like having a new arm without an old weakness from an old bone break.

 

[Ghel]

Well, sure. He's been dead since he beamed his mind into space in Lonely Among Us. Just like Spock's been dead since Wrath of Khan, Chakotay's been dead since Cathexis...

Right?!? Honestly, if a transfer or discontinuity of consciousness is all it takes to be considered dead in Star Trek, then every time a character transported, he or she died. Most of our heroes have only made it through a fraction of a television show before a transporter ripped them apart and rebuilt a new character elsewhere. I'm not sure how we can suspend our disbelief regarding this but think that a consciousness transfer somehow crosses a line...

 

[Dar70]

Right?!? Honestly, if a transfer or discontinuity of consciousness is all it takes to be considered dead in Star Trek, then every time a character transported, he or she died. Most of our heroes have only made it through a fraction of a television show before a transporter ripped them apart and rebuilt a new character elsewhere. I'm not sure how we can suspend our disbelief regarding this but think that a consciousness transfer somehow crosses a line...

His consciousness was not transferred. It was mapped and scanned according to dialogue. It's a copy. Picard is dead. Also people are conscious during transport. That has DEFINITELY been seen in trek. Why people ignore that bit of info is beyond me...

 

[Dar70]

Nope. Jean-Luc Picard is alive. His consciousness was transferred from the body he was born with to a new body, same as Spock in Star Trek III.



Deconstructionism is not trashing -- it just means taking something apart to see a deeper truth underneath it. Deconstructionism can, in fact, be loving and affirming of the thing it's deconstructing. DS9 was deconstructionist of TNG. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was deconstructionist of the character of James T. Kirk. PIC S1 was deconstructionist of Jean-Luc Picard. And all three affirmed the value of and love for the subjects of their deconstruction.



And you accuse modern writers of being nihilistic?



Adding more depth and complexity to the franchise than it had before is not to its detriment.



The point was to have Picard come to terms with his own mortality and the mortality of everyone he loves, and then reward him with new life. A sci-fi version of death and resurrection as regeneration, with a dash of Orpheus descending into the Underworld.



PIC S1 is absolutely not nihilistic. It may be existentialist, but it roundly rejects nihilism.



Historically, difficult times have produced both works of escapism and works of deconstructionism, and neither response is more valid than the other. Star Trek has itself also always been about both -- episodes like "The Trouble with Tribbles" or "A Piece of the Action" are clearly just escapism, and episodes like "The City on the Edge of Forever," "A Private Little War," "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield," etc., are clearly episodes responding to and trying to deconstruct the political situations that existed at the time of their production.



That's a really good point! I wonder if the fact that this was a new brain is also why he was able to handle seeing the Borg again without having a PTSD response? If his current brain doesn't have those triggers wired into it, he might be able to respond to certain stimuli, like encounter the Borg again, without falling into those old trauma spirals. Like having a new arm without an old weakness from an old bone break.

You apparently didnt follow the dialogue. It was a copied consciousness. Scanned and mapped. There is not one atom of the original Picard left. It's all a copy.

 

[Sci]

You apparently didnt follow the dialogue. It was a copied consciousness. Scanned and mapped. There is not one atom of the original Picard left. It's all a copy.

They scan and map people when they beam them too; that's not an indication that it's a copy rather than a continuation of the original consciousness in the world of Star Trek.

 

[Dar70]

They scan and map people when they beam them too; that's not an indication that it's a copy rather than a continuation of the original consciousness in the world of Star Trek.

"Before your brain functions ceased, Dr. Soong and jerahti with help from Soji were able to Scan, map and transfer a complete neural image of your brain substrates"...

Sounds like a copy to me...

Every Atom of Picard is gone. Most importantly including the only ones that remain with us through our whole lives. Atoms located in the brain. So zero Atoms of Picard left and a copied conscious. The transporter argument cannot be used...

 

[The Old Mixer]

His consciousness was not transferred. It was mapped and scanned according to dialogue. It's a copy. Picard is dead. Also people are conscious during transport. That has DEFINITELY been seen in trek. Why people ignore that bit of info is beyond me...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Dar70]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

But it's an accurate song rather than the lame reasons people are trying to come up with or transporter excuses...

 

[JWPlatt]

Every Atom of Picard is gone. Most importantly including the only ones that remain with us through our whole lives. Atoms located in the brain.

As much as I prefer support of my same conclusion that Picard is dead and only his golem now exists, I would as a scientist not make the claim that the atoms in our brains remain the same. We are largely replaced throughout our lives, even in our brains. Brain cells don't regenerate, but new brain cells are introduced throughout our lives. We lose neurons every day. I know that weakens our POV because if who we are changes daily - see "Ship of Theseus" - then what's the difference between us and Picard? Well, the writers replaced the entire "ship" using the blueprints - not even piece by piece of it slowly over time.

 

[fireproof78]

"Before your brain functions ceased, Dr. Soong and jerahti with help from Soji were able to Scan, map and transfer a complete neural image of your brain substrates"...

Sounds like a copy to me...

Every Atom of Picard is gone. Most importantly including the only ones that remain with us through our whole lives. Atoms located in the brain. So zero Atoms of Picard left and a copied conscious. The transporter argument cannot be used...

You know what is also a part of Star Trek? Separating the soul/mind from the body.

Same Picard.

 

[JWPlatt]

Can this procedure only be done with the dead? If not, which would be the real Picard? Both?

Cue Riker. Two individuals. Kill William. Is William dead or alive?

Same golem Picard in name only.

 

[The Old Mixer]

The telling part here, which might have been mentioned upthread, will be if they establish that Picard in the alternate timeline is now in that timeline's original, biological body. If that's the case, then how could the Picard in the synth body not be the original Picard?

 

[Dar70]

As much as I prefer support of my same conclusion that Picard is dead and only his golem now exists, I would as a scientist not make the claim that the atoms in our brains remain the same. We are largely replaced throughout our lives, even in our brains. Brain cells don't regenerate, but new brain cells are introduced throughout our lives. We lose neurons every day. I know that weakens our POV because if who we are changes daily - see "Ship of Theseus" - then what's the difference between us and Picard? Well, the writers replaced the entire "ship" using the blueprints - not even piece by piece of it slowly over time.

But is the brain not the one area there are some original cells from birth??
Heres an interesting talk on it..
https://www.northcountrypublicradio...31/is-any-part-of-the-body-original-equipment
So EVERYTHING is new in Picard. Even his tooth enamel...lol...

 

[fireproof78]

But, how do you separate the mind from the body like Trek has done in the past?

 

[Dar70]

You know what is also a part of Star Trek? Separating the soul/mind from the body.

Same Picard.

Unless they retcon it....that's not what the dialogue said. Also it's a gray area with the soul on Star Trek. People bring up the whole Sargon thing or the Janet lester thing. But I'm more inclined to think the personalities changed and part of what made them them is still in the brain.