Spock got HITCHED?!?
- Thread starter Too Much Fun
- Start date
Seriously now - Syrran was supposed to have had Surak's katra in him for 17 years, and he seemed to be doing OK.Well, it didn't look like a survivable condition for him, either...
However, no, I'm not saying you have to be half-wit to start with... It's just that having an extra set of "essence" in your brain can ruin the rest of your life.
Timo Saloniemi
That begs the question though: Does that mean that a Vulcan can simply "upload" a copy of themself into any host, willing or unwilling, or even into multiple hosts and have then several copies of themselves running around? Is the katra not unique to the individual and a "one person at a time" kinda thing?
Well, McCoy seems to know how to operate the science station equipment on the Enterprise, something I would assume he wouldn't have known before. And if that's the case, then it would seem like McCoy got enough of Spock's knowledge and memories to have detailed technical information. That seems, to me at least, a bit more than what I'd describe as "Spock's essence."
I always took away the impression from his conversation with Saavik that the regenerated Spock understood what she was saying, particularly when she asks if he trusts her. I could be wrong, of course, but that's the impression I got.
It seems somewhat unclear how much or how little the "rejoined" Spock got back from the katra. We see in the beginning that he has to struggle to even remember the names of his closest colleagues. And we see him having to be completely re-educated and retrained, despite the fact that when his katra was in McCoy, it still seemed to possess its technical skills.
But then by the time of TFF it seems that Spock is back to his old self, complete with memories of his childhood, his long-lost brother, and so forth. Did he relearn all of that, or did his own memories from his katra just take a while to reintegrate themselves? And, if the latter, why all the rushed retaining? Why not just let him take the time to get his own knowledge and memories back?
Why should it be unique? Why should any person be unique? There's no law of nature to tell that there can't be two of me around... Or, say, 3.14 of me.
It would seem natural that the information degrades a bit with every transfer...
And it didn't seem to me that McCoy really knew that much about operating a science station. He just knew how to say "Indications are negative at this time"...
I'd probably vote for the latter. But it would probably be a difficult process, requiring expert help from fellow telepaths - thus best handled while the patient was still on Vulcan.
Timo Saloniemi
Well, let's turn that around then. It was never stated that Sarek had any other sons, so therefore, he did not. And since we know Sybok died long before Picard was ever born, then it MUST have been Spock who got married. We know this by both your logic and mine.
Epic Logical Fail. An infinite number of untold events (facts) exist in the Trek universe. The line does not specify that the person WAS Spock, that is fact. This is more specific than a fact NOT being stated or omitted (Sarek having any other sons, biological, adopted or otherwise). Sorry but the concept that it 'could' be someone else other than Spock is valid, logically and not contradicted.
Of course it *could* be someone else, but it probably isn't.
Granted, the dialogue doesn't say it was Spock who got married. But it doesn't have to say that. We can take certain things on faith, without having to be told them. We never heard about Sarek having any other sons (than Spock and Sybok), and so until we DO hear that, then by definition, no such sons exist. And since Sybok died before Picard was ever born, Spock is the only son left who could have been the groom.
Actually, it would be logical to assume that other sons exist.
After all, both Sybok and Spock were failures. And Sarek doesn't really tolerate failure or dissent. Sarek's life ended with him officially hating Spock's guts, despite the brief rapport between ST4 and what was probably the 2340s. Surely he would have sired other sons and daughters, ones with a better grasp of what it takes to be a good Vulcan.
Also, it's illogical to have two children or fewer, as Sarek must take care of perpetuating the species. Sure, he'd not be wasting a Vulcan female's procreative potential in having just Spock, but he'd still have to sire a replacement for Sybok in order to get even (and several replacements if he takes into account that Spock, or any child of his and Perrin's, would be only half Vulcan). Assuming, of course, that Sybok didn't already do his part for the Vulcan survival cause. But somehow I doubt that... Where'd a laughing Vulcan find a mate?
Timo Saloniemi
I have to agree with 22 Stars - there really is no way to tell. But I'll go a bit further and say that I think that particular line was written that way on purpose. It's something put in there specifically to give detail-obsessed fans - such as me, for instance, or you, Laser Beam, or Too Much, the OP - something to wonder about. There is no way - at least not that I can see - that they tossed that line in there expecting that it would be clear to everybody who is being referred to. They wrote that line ambiguously deliberately.
If they wanted to make it clear, they could so easily have made it clear: "I met him at his son Spock's wedding" or "I met him at his youngest son's wedding" or "his stepson's wedding." But they elected not to do that, and to me it's pretty obvious that the vagueness is there on purpose.
It's just a little gift of ambiguity to us fans.
^ In the end, though, we might as well think it's Spock (retroactively). Because we will never see these characters onscreen again - all future Trek films will most likely be Abramsverse. And so the only times we will ever see the 'prime' timeline will be in the novels, non-canon though they may be. And *there*, it is most definitely Spock who got married, to Saavik. No other novel is going to contradict that. So that's as close as we're ever getting to a settlement.
Besides, doesn't it simply make the most sense to have it be Spock anyway? If the writers were going to invent a never-before-seen third son of Sarek, that would be rather silly, wouldn't it? Kind of like Chuck Cunningham in reverse. A character who suddenly *appears* without explanation, is no more believable than one who disappears without a trace after a season.
Besides, doesn't it simply make the most sense to have it be Spock anyway? If the writers were going to invent a never-before-seen third son of Sarek, that would be rather silly, wouldn't it? Kind of like Chuck Cunningham in reverse. A character who suddenly *appears* without explanation, is no more believable than one who disappears without a trace after a season.
^ A valentine, then? 
These Are The Ambiguities. 
^ 
Oh, sure. Spock's the most likely answer.
But still. I keep coming back to the simple fact that they could have made it clear so easily, and yet they did not. And why not? My theory is: Just for fun. Everybody's got to have a hobby.
Oh, sure. Spock's the most likely answer.
But still. I keep coming back to the simple fact that they could have made it clear so easily, and yet they did not. And why not? My theory is: Just for fun. Everybody's got to have a hobby.
^ A valentine, then?
It's perfectly clear.
1. At this point in time Spock does not have a brother other than his half-brother Saavik.
2. If, at some future point in time, a writer of a new movie or series decides that Spock does have another brother, then at this point in time Spock does have another brother.
It is simple temporal character definition.
1. At this point in time Spock does not have a brother other than his half-brother Saavik.
2. If, at some future point in time, a writer of a new movie or series decides that Spock does have another brother, then at this point in time Spock does have another brother.
It is simple temporal character definition.
Similar threads
- Poll
