The fate of Jonathan Archer

[Admiral_Young]

Here is Archer's personnel file from In A Mirror Darkly thanks to Memory Alpha...

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:Jonathan_Archer_personnel_file.jpg

It can easily be explained that Archer returned to duty after a short hiatus from the Enterprise as her Captain.

 

[wissaboo]

He's retired from the Presidency - long ago - and been head of the Academy since. He prefers "Admiral."

I like that explanation

 

[Servo]

^ No since we are in an alternate timeline.

So?

I don't see why we're even debating about this..

Cause it's a Star Trek message board. What else is there to do with Trek forums when there's no Trek show running?

it was clearly a shout out to "Enterprise" and Jonathon Archer, right down to the reference of Porthos.

I can see Archer living that long, but I highly doubt Porthos was still around.

 

[Admiral_Young]

You're right...I shouldn't have dismissed that possibility out of hand and I wasn't attacking your suggestion, I just feel the writers and JJ meant for 'Admiral Archer' to be Jonathon Archer and it was a shout out to "Enterprise".

 

[T'Girl]

The issue is whether Scotty's reference to him as "Admiral Archer" is compatible with Archer being a former Federation President (since IRL, former presidents are always called President - even if they are veterans).

Former Presidents being referred to as "President" is a social title, similar to retired military being referred to by their last rank (or rate). Some former (US) Presidents have preferred their former military ranks over President in their later private lives, Washington , Roosevelt (Teddy) and Eisenhower come to mind.

Former Presidents do go on to do other things, it wouldn't be impossible for Archer to followed the Presidency with a few years as the Head of the Academy, where he would be a Admiral.

I think it likely that either Scotty didn't realize this, and called Archer an Admiral even though he was a former President

Or, being a member of Starfleet, Scotty referred to him by the one of the two terms that members of Starfleet would use for Archer.

 

[Mach5]

He's retired from the Presidency - long ago - and been head of the Academy since. He prefers "Admiral."

Makes sense. Did a single 4 year term, went on to serve as ambassador to Andoria for a year or two, grew tired of politics and returned to Starfleet.

 

[Admiral Shran]

^ I prefer to think he served a while as an Ambassador, then served a single term as President before returning to Starfleet. But that's just me.

 

[AMQ]

I like to think that he was always somewhere near the action, whatever the position, and for as long as he could - not too much in politics - he would lose his charm

 

[Sci]

From what I've read, it seems that the practice of referring to former Presidents as "Mister President" has only evolved in the past sixty or so years. Up until about the time of Truman and Eisenhower, it was expected that former Presidents would revert to using whatever title they'd achieved highest prior to the Presidency; but around that time, the living former Presidents started being called "Mister President" and no one said them nay.

Seems odd to me not to continue calling them "Mister President" out of respect for their former office.

Err, is it necessary to mention that Archer was supposedly the Federation President, not the US President? I know you guys love to think it's the same thing, but it's not.

Custom didn't need to change, since it's not the same custom to begin with.

While I suppose I shouldn't be, since it's so comparatively new, I'm surprised to think it's not a universal custom. I'm surprised to imagine that a former President of the Italian Republic wouldn't be referred to as, "Signor Presidente."

^ I prefer to think he served a while as an Ambassador, then served a single term as President before returning to Starfleet. But that's just me.

Well, according to the graphic, President Archer was in office from 2184 to 2192. So if he only served one term, that's an awfully long term of office...

 

[cooleddie74]

I tend to jibe with the Defiant's computer screen bio in "IaMD" and say Archer went on to become one of the early presidents of the Federation. Seems kinda fitting, seeing as how he always thought of himself as more of an explorer and diplomat than a soldier.

 

[Middleman]

Isn't it entirely possible that Admiral Archer is President Archer's son?

I don't think so .... based on this response from Bob Orci, one of the writers of Star Trek XI, to a question asked of him.

BobOrci: Yes, it is. Admiral Archer is a reference to the Archer we all know and love, and yes he would be over 100, which is a likely life expectancy in a futuristic space faring race of humans (as depicted by McCoy’s (Deforest Kelley) in THE NEXT GENERATION.

http://trekmovie.com/2009/05/22/orci-and-kurtzman-reveal-star-trek-details-in-trekmovie-fan-qa/

 

[Jetfire]

I think Archer should retire to a farm in Iowa(?) and they can just have that ship named after him.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Apparently the alternate timeline saved Archer's life, as according to that very same bio screen in IAMD, the prime timeline has Archer dying in 2245 - many years before ST XI took place (and also probably before nuScotty had that run-in with him).

 

[6079SmithW]

Why can't he be both? He rises to the rank of admiral, retires, gets elected president as a civilian, and once his term is up maybe he re-enters starfleet and his old rank is retained. This scenario isn't impossible because even today people can leave the service and re-enlist later on if they choose. He probably isn't active on a ship anymore, so maybe he supervises at the academy. Kirk mentioned liking his dog so this proves he meets with cadets.


I think it was clearly intended for "admiral Archer" to be the same one from Enterprise and not a descendent. The reference doesn't make sense otherwise as it was clearly an easter egg. His age isn't a problem with the supposed advances in medical tech, and as was mentioned we saw McCoy live to see 1701-D.

 

[Shatnertage]

We don't need a split alternate timeline for this. He easily could have been President and still referred to as Admiral Archer.

I remember my high school history teacher telling us about what a big deal it was when General Eisenhower visited his hometown when he was a kid. For him, the dominant image of Eisenhower was as Supreme Allied Commander, even though he did a lot after that.

Probably the same thing with Archer.

And it's not like he was formally introduced by the head of the protocol committee. It was an offhand remark by Scotty.

I personally didn't interpret it as the same Archer from ENT--just a reference that fans of the show would get.

 

[commodore64]

It doesn't have to be the same Archer. I don't care what the intent was. It was probably Jonathan's son or grandson.

And even if not, it was only Scotty who called him Admiral. Maybe Scotty just got it wrong? Meaning, he didn't know the proper form of address?

The writers of STXI actually indicated it was the same one ... and the same Porthos. (Not sure how that's possible!) In fact, they sounded grouchy they'd gotten so many questions about it.

 

[6079SmithW]

I am personally pleased that the writers have confirmed that it actually was our Archer and his Porthos. That is what I took the lines spoken by Scott and Kirk to mean ever since my first viewing of the movie. The reference was supposed to be a tribute/continuity nod to the Enterprise series and I'm glad they did it. The reference doesn't make sense if it is not the Archer and the beagle. I guess great medical tech exists for increasing the longevity of your pets, as well as yourself, in the future.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The thing that most people forget is that McCoy was surprised to still be alive after 137 years, so people naturally assumed that it was normal for Humans to live that long. I'm sure Human lifespans probably have increased to the point where living past 100 or even 110 is fairly common, but Humans reaching the point of McCoy's age may be extremely rare, IMO.

 

[MikeSussman]

As the author of the Archer bio, I can confirm that -- at least in the prime timeline -- Archer clung to life just long enough to personally witness the launch of the NCC-1701 in 2245, and died peacefully the next day. In the alternate timeline, he held on an extra thirteen years in order to see the maiden flight of the Enterprise-JJ in 2258 -- after which he promptly dropped dead.

 

[Mach5]

As the author of the Archer bio, I can confirm that -- at least in the prime timeline -- Archer clung to life just long enough to personally witness the launch of the NCC-1701 in 2245, and died peacefully the next day. In the alternate timeline, he held on an extra thirteen years in order to see the maiden flight of the Enterprise-JJ in 2258 -- after which he promptly dropped dead.

But... He was only 146!

Can't we just assume that sometime prior to 2258 he got stuck in a temporal causality loop like Captain Morgan Bateson in "Cause and effect" and remained young while the universe around him aged?