Who invented Khan?

[Ovation]

Characters cannot act differently than they are written and it seems pretty clear that the errors are from the production, not in-story, though even in-story the notion of Khan being Sikh is very tenuous at best. It’s essentially a line of dialogue and a painting that doesn’t actually depict a typical Sikh man.

Come to think of it, the line in Into Darkness where Khan says Harrison is a fiction created by Marcus offers almost as much weight of evidence to infer some cosmetic surgery was done as the evidence in Space Seed suggests Khan is a Sikh. Both are conjecture, neither one more compelling than the other taken in isolation. Constant rewatching of TOS has more to do with accepting McGiver’s speculation as fact than anything actually presented.

 

[DonIago]

If Khan was never a turban wearing man, I don't doubt that he would have called out McGivers for incorrectly painting him wearing a turban. Seeing himself depicted in a way that he never was, would not have sit well with Khan imo.

OTOH, Khan needed an ally on the ship; someone familiar with it. I think it's entirely possible Khan would put Marla's strategic value over his personal feelings for her here...though I also think that in time he developed genuine feelings for her.

 

[Christopher]

If Khan was never a turban wearing man, I don't doubt that he would have called out McGivers for incorrectly painting him wearing a turban. Seeing himself depicted in a way that he never was, would not have sit well with Khan imo.

Why? It's not a photograph. Art is interpretive, not literal. It doesn't have to be "correct." It's about conveying the artist's feelings, or inspiring a feeling in the observer.

 

[CoveTom]

I am Catholic. Within my mother's lifetime, women wouldn't be in church without a head covering. Now, women with head coverings at Mass are the exception, not the rule. Religious practices change.

 

[Therin of Andor]

It's definitely possible that Khan wasn't Sikh but wore a turban anyway, for whatever reason. It could be that Khan appropriated the costumes of the people that he conquered...

Khan Noonien Singh headdress by Ian McLean, on Flickr

Fashion is cyclic...

Restoration by Tom Spina Designs: Khan from "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan". Original Khan headdress, as worn by the legendary Ricardo Montalban.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Bono, Cher, Beyonce, Madonna, Oprah, Prince...and Khan.

And Star Trek VI's Iman.

 

[Christopher]

I am Catholic. Within my mother's lifetime, women wouldn't be in church without a head covering. Now, women with head coverings at Mass are the exception, not the rule. Religious practices change.

Was that really a formal religious dress code, though, or just a cultural convention? I mean, within my parents' lifetime, it would've been a social norm for both men and women to wear hats in public.

 

[SatrianiRules]

I am Catholic. Within my mother's lifetime, women wouldn't be in church without a head covering. Now, women with head coverings at Mass are the exception, not the rule. Religious practices change.

that's true, as society moves forward, some religious practices get modified, or even abandoned in a greater reflection of society.
I think Pope Francis RIP (please correct me if I'm wrong), felt the need to re-evaluate the stance on homosexuality, even female priests, since younger people, particularly younger Catholics perspectives had changed on so many issues.

 

[Christopher]

The Khalsa and their dress code were themselves a change in Sikh practice, introduced by the tenth Guru about 200 years after the founding of Sikhism (though more than 300 years before the present). And again, the dress code is not mandatory for all Sikhs, just Khalsa males.

 

[feek61]

who knows, maybe by that time practices changed and Sikhs weren't as rigid about hair etc...much like someday Hijabs might become optional in all countries even those where they are presently required.

Except that the Botany Bay launched in the 1990's

 

[CoveTom]

Was that really a formal religious dress code, though, or just a cultural convention? I mean, within my parents' lifetime, it would've been a social norm for both men and women to wear hats in public.

No, it was an actual formal requirement, though adherence to it varied of course. The requirement for women to have some form of head covering at Mass was explicitly contained in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, for example. The requirement wasn't officially abolished until the 1983 Code of Canon Law (the most recent one), but I believe practical, real-world adherence to it had significantly dropped in the 1960's and 1970's, particularly after the adoption of the revised Mass.

Except that the Botany Bay launched in the 1990's

That is a very good point.

 

[1001001]

I really do not want to move this thread into a discussion of Catholic doctrine

Yes, please don’t.

Thanks.

 

[Kor]

...

Of all the ethnic labels, "white" is probably the nastiest one, because it's generally defined on the basis of whom it excludes. And that means the definition can change over time depending on whom it's considered acceptable to discriminate against. (I prefer to think of myself as "Anglo-American," since my paternal ancestors came over from England in 1634, though my maternal ancestors came from Scotland in 1790. Is "Britanno-American" a thing?)

In Australia they use the term "Anglo-Celtic" as a lot of people have similar heritage.

Of course, to be pedantic, "Celtic" was originally supposed to be a linguistic term for a particular group of languages, not an indicator of geography or ethnicity. But as I recall, this ethno-nationalist rhetoric about a "Celtic race" started appearing in literature some time around the 19th century.

Back on the topic of Khan, even if he never wore a turban himself, the exact moment of uncovering the painting probably wouldn't have been a great time to raise a stink about it and get Marla on the defensive. He still hadn't acknowledged his exact identity, details of his background, and whatnot, and he wanted to get her on his side.

Kor

 

[fireproof78]

Sorry, watching the episode makes Marla look like she's jumping to conclusions. It's problematic to me. Khan in ID is less problematic to me.

 

[Ovation]

this ethno-nationalist rhetoric about a "Celtic race" started appearing in literature some time around the 19th century.

Wasn’t confined to Celts. Ethno-nationalist rhetoric is largely a product of 19th century European imperialism, though its roots run earlier. Along with that attitude was a general ignorance of other cultures, which persisted quite a while. The confusion about Khan during the episode’s production is merely an illustrative example.

 

[Ronald Held]

That's how I rationalized it in my Eugenics Wars novels. As the epitome of a new breed of humanity, Khan did not consider himself bound by the traditions and customs of mere ordinary humans.

Perhaps that is where I got the idea from. Thanks Mr. Cox

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Of all the ethnic labels, "white" is probably the nastiest one, because it's generally defined on the basis of whom it excludes.

"People of Color" is defined on the basis of whom it excludes. It has literally no other criteria. It pointedly excludes one global minority while admitting everyone else on the planet. So is that "nasty" too?

 

[Christopher]

Of course, to be pedantic, "Celtic" was originally supposed to be a linguistic term for a particular group of languages, not an indicator of geography or ethnicity.

I think that's true of a number of labels, such as Bantu.

 

[UssGlenn]

"People of Color" is defined on the basis of whom it excludes. It has literally no other criteria. It pointedly excludes one global minority while admitting everyone else on the planet. So is that "nasty" too?

Not only that but it's contradictory since it includes Asians, many of whom are paler than many Caucasians.

 

[fireproof78]

People should not look up the etymology of barbarian then.