• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Klingon chancellor Kesh (minor spoilers for Forged in Fire)

Babaganoosh said:
Sci said:
I think it's safe to say that In the Name of Honor is no longer in continuity with the current crop of novels.
Click to expand...

How do you mean? :confused:
Click to expand...

There have been numerous citations of discontinuity between In the Name of Honor and the current crop of novels in this thread, including Gorkon's being a newly-elected Klingon Councillor in In the Name of Honor (set between ST5 and ST6) but his already being an established Councillor in Star Trek: Vanguard (set during TOS), and discontinuity over the timing of when Kesh left office and Gorkon assumed it.

Of course, In the Name of Honor's being out of continuity with the current novels doesn't preclude elements of it from being referenced as in-continuity -- take, for example, the reference to the planet Talin and the Enterprise's incident there from Prime Directive in the recent Corps of Engineers entry The Future Begins, even though Prime Directive's version of the Federation government differs radically from the version established in Articles of the Federation, which is also referenced in The Future Begins.

In other words: Even if it's out of continuity, it's still a good book and you should all enjoy it!
 
A few discrepancies don't mean a book is out of continuity; it just means it's a challenge for a future author to come up with an explanation for the discrepancies. Heck, Homecoming/The Farther Shore conflicts with The Left Hand of Destiny in its depiction of the planet Boreth, but they're both still in continuity, and the contradictions are reconcilable. (H/TFS depicts a nature preserve on Boreth, while TLHoD depicts a barren, icy Boreth with no indigenous life. These can be reconciled by assuming the nature preserve is a terraformed portion of the planet with life imported from offworld.)
 
A few discrepancies don't mean a book is out of continuity; it just means it's a challenge for a future author to come up with an explanation for the discrepancies.
Click to expand...

Amen, Chris! As I said on another blog, I LOVE finding discrepancies in the books. I immediately stop reading, close my eyes, clear my mind of all distractions, and mentally connect the dots. If my explanation is dramatic enough, it could very well be a basis for a story!

If not, I'll just insert it in a story I'm working on.
 
In the Name of Honor also refers to Gorkon as a "recently elected" member of the council, but he's mentioned as a Councillor in Vanguard: Harbinger
Click to expand...

I'm perfectly ignorant of the actual content of the more recent Klingon books, but assuming these reports here are correct to the letter, I don't see any contradiction.

That is, a Councillor, or a member of the High Council, would be different from a Chancellor, or the leader of the High Council. A person aspiring to become a Chancellor would no doubt be a Councillor first. And a Councillor would probably have to be elected again and again, at more or less regular intervals, sometimes skipping a term or three. So there's nothing wrong with, say, Gorkon being a "newly elected Councillor" half a dozen separate times during his career.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Last edited:
Timo said:
A person aspiring to become a Chancellor would no doubt be a Councillor first.
Click to expand...

The position of Chancellor seems to be open to anyone who successfully challenges and kills the incumbent. Martok, for example, went straight from his position as General to the office of Chancellor (AFAIK, he'd never served on the council before).
 
Martok would seem to be a rather special case, as he seemed to think his lack of nobleman status was a major hindrance for his career. For all we know, he was the very first non-nobleman to make Chancellor, and perhaps the very first to have that responsibility and position voluntarily handed to him by another (that is, Worf, who for this purpose seems to count as nobility).

Where is it stated that Gowron didn't have previous political standing such as Councillor position? "Reunion" establishes him as "outsider", but that could just as well mean "representative for an extremist opposition party". Such a position would better allow him to do his "repeatedly challenge the Council" thing anyway - why should anybody in the Council mind the rantings of a nobody in the public galleries (if the Council Chambers have any) or over the Klingon internet?

Timo Saloniemi
 
Timo said:
Where is it stated that Gowron didn't have previous political standing such as Councillor position? "Reunion" establishes him as "outsider", but that could just as well mean "representative for an extremist opposition party". Such a position would better allow him to do his "repeatedly challenge the Council" thing anyway - why should anybody in the Council mind the rantings of a nobody in the public galleries (if the Council Chambers have any) or over the Klingon internet?
Click to expand...

Who says that anyone who isn't on the council is a "nobody?" You yourself just acknowledged that Martok was an exception for being a commoner who became chancellor. Since Gowron was the chancellor before him, it therefore follows that Gowron was a member of the nobility. That would have automatically given him influence in Klingon society.

Besides, the High Council can't be the only legislative body for the entire interstellar empire. Gowron could've been a governor or a member of some regional legislature.

Although let's not forget the obvious. We are dealing with Klingons here, and they admire prowess in battle. As we saw in "Reunion," the candidates for chancellor had to list their accomplishments as warriors as part of the competition. Gowron could have won influence by proving himself a mighty warrior.
 
Timo said:
Martok would seem to be a rather special case, as he seemed to think his lack of nobleman status was a major hindrance for his career.
Click to expand...

Actually, it *was*. Remember his attitude towards Kor? Back in the day, Kor had rejected Martok's application to join the military because Martok was from a 'common' house.
 
Timo said:
(that is, Worf, who for this purpose seems to count as nobility).
Click to expand...

The House of Mogh was nobility. I don't have an exact quote handy, but Kor said as much, or at least implied it by treating Worf as an equal when it was already established he treated commoners (like young Martok) as inconsequential.

Granted, by the time of Worf's challenge Gowron had dissolved the House of Mogh, but all it takes is for the councillors to politely ignore that technicality, especially since Worf won the fight.
 
I think anyone who comes from the House of Anybody is a member of the nobility by definition. Commoners don't have Houses, unless they become successful enough as warriors to earn the right to found their own, as Martok did.
 
Absolutely not. No honorable pizza courier would give up his or her life without a food fight.

I just think we should be examining venues for making Gowron a Councillor prior to "Reunion" since a book or two would mesh with continuity better that way, not trying to list the many ways he could avoid being a Councillor before ascending to Chancellorship.

As for the idea that the "House of" thing is a mark of nobility in itself, I heartily second. Although apparently getting adopted is a valid and perhaps common way to attain nobility, a bit unlike the usual medieval stereotype and more like the old Roman example.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Timo said:
I just think we should be examining venues for making Gowron a Councillor prior to "Reunion" since a book or two would mesh with continuity better that way, not trying to list the many ways he could avoid being a Councillor before ascending to Chancellorship.
Click to expand...
I disagree completely.

Also, more evidence that Gowron wasn't a Councillor prior to ascending to the chancellorship: He didn't know about Duras's father being the one to betray the empire at Khitomer, nor about Worf accepting dishonor in his place to keep unity on the High Council. Gowron's precise response was a shocked: "The Council knew?" Which means he was not part of it.

It seems obvious to me that the intention of referring to him as an outsider who has often challenged the High Council in "Reunion" was to make it clear that he wasn't on the council, and that line in "Redemption" confirms it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top