Ent. Episode 6 "The Andorian Incident"

Quote:

---

Eh. Well, I was disappointed that the Andorians were basically little more than thugs...

---

I wouldn't call them thugs. They're soldiers, not necessarily gentlemen soldiers. They went in and got what they needed to get and left. At least they kept Archer's crew and the Vulcan monks alive. I wouldnt. (What can I say? I'm a Klingon at heart.) :cool:

If the Vulcans have some complaint about the incident, they can either go through diplomatic channel or retaliate in kind.

Hopefully we will see more of the Andorians. That one episode alone can't fully describe the bulk of their society any more can you describe Earth's diversified cultures.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Azar Kel
[B]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Salinger


That's very true. Which leads me to believe that if they ever named the third planet of the Sol system after the native sentient species, it wouldn't be Humia. :p

Isn't the name on record Terra? As in Terrans?

---

That's one little detail I really liked in Babylon 5 - nearly every time the Narn, Centauri etc are talking about humans, they refer to us as "the Earthers".

I'd imagine there's a word in each of the Vulcan, Andorian, Bajoran, etc languages for themselves that roughly translates as "human being".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by REG

Hopefully we will see more of the Andorians.

---

You get your wish...Shran himself will be back (presumedly with more Andorians in tow) in an ep that goes before the cameras in a couple of weeks (this according to press releases on several sites).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aldaron


That's one little detail I really liked in Babylon 5 - nearly every time the Narn, Centauri etc are talking about humans, they refer to us as "the Earthers".

I'd imagine there's a word in each of the Vulcan, Andorian, Bajoran, etc languages for themselves that roughly translates as "human being".

---

I really did like the Ferengi term "HEw-mon"

I wasn't aiming at anyone, I don't even agree with the views I express in my Pirates of Penzance parodies.

Oh good. I'm still smarting from threads on trekbbs.com where the intelligence of anyone who enjoys Enterprise seems to be labelled a "drooling Bermanite fanboy" who would watch anything they put out.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fesarius
Chronologically, weren't they introduced in TOS episode "Journey to Babel"? Regardless of the fact that these Andorians had different antennae located in a different place. At that time, didn't the Ambassador (Shras?) describe his people as "violent and passionate"? If my memory is correct, I don't see much of a continuity grenade, here.

---

"Violent", yes, but not "passsionate". The passion reference comes from later in the same conversation with Spock, but not regarding Andorian temperment.

"Perhaps you should forget logic and seek out motivations of passion or gain. These are reasons for murder." -- Andorian ambassador after Spock notes that there is no logic in Gav's murder or in the attack on Kirk.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rgilbert


The shorter "Andor" sounds better because it sounds stronger. The "ia" is weaker. I don't think the "ians" logic necessarily follows, either. Peru->Peruvians, not Peruvans.

The earlier writers obviously had an ear for stronger names.

Robbie

---

I'd like to elaborate on this a bit. While any discussion of "what sounds good" as far as names are concerned must by necessity involve subjectivity, there are some naming rules that tend to support "Andor" being stronger than "Andoria":

(1) Shorter names tend to be stronger than longer names. This is true only up to a point: two-syllable names often sound better than one-syllable names, but Andoria is 4 syllables to Andor's 2 syllables.

(2) Names ending in "-a" tend to suggest gentleness: flora, fauna. I expect Andoria to be (1) a pleasure planet like Risa, or (2) a highly refined, cultured planet. I must admit that Andoria probably sounds better if you are looking for a more fluid, rolling name like many words in the French language, but this is not what I am looking for when I think of the Andorians.

(3) Names ending in a vowel plus "r" tend to be stronger names, names often associated with action: Quasar and Zandor (from The Herculoids), pulsar, sonar, radar, phaser. This is why Andor, Tellar, and Bajor all sound stronger than "Andoria," "Tellaria," and "Bajoria" (in my opinion). But Cardassia sounds better than Cardass because the sibilant ending does not sound right to the ear. I think the stronger "Andor" is more in keeping with the warlike nature of the Andorian clans.

In early TOS episodes, the plan was for Vulcan to be called Vulcanis and its inhabitants to be called Vulcanians. "Vulcanian" is mentioned in several early episodes. This was dropped, due in part, I suspect, to the weaker sound of the longer names. Vulcan, for both race and planet, sounds so much stronger, in keeping with the original primitiveness and the current strength of its inhabitants. Can you imagine "Vulcania"? I can't. I also think Andoran is slightly stronger than Andorian. The double-vowel seems to add to the weakness. Note that my discussion here is not as much about canon as about what sounds stronger.

I would also like to clarify my Peru analogy. What I meant is that our language rules are not consistent enough that the root can always be determined from the derived word. Just because people are called Peruvians does not mean their country has to be called Peruvia (it's Peru). Just because people are called Bolians does not mean their planet is called Bolia (it's Bolarus). Just because people are called Talosians doesn't mean their planet is called Talosia (it's Talos IV).

There also appears to be some dispute about Neelix's home world being Talax or Talaxia. In this case I'm not sure the shorter form sounds as good as the longer form--the "-x" ending may have similar problems to the sibilant ending for "Cardass".

When I first opened the LUG RPG book, I was disappointed to see the word "Andoria." I still wince every time I see it, and I will not say it. One the whole, though, I think the LUG products are very good. And I can understand why some might prefer the fluid, rolling sound of "Andoria."
:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bill Harris


"Violent", yes, but not "passsionate". The passion reference comes from later in the same conversation with Spock, but not regarding Andorian temperment.

"Perhaps you should forget logic and seek out motivations of passion or gain. These are reasons for murder." -- Andorian ambassador after Spock notes that there is no logic in Gav's murder or in the attack on Kirk.

---

One of the great all-time quotes from TOS! I love it. Similar to McCoy telling Spock that the big monster-things might be reacting out of emotion, out of feeling, in "Galileo Seven," but much more sarcastically stated. For the Andorians' few minutes of screen time, Shras depicted them well.

Hmm....I wish I had had time to say something when this was still fresh in my mind. But here is an attempt to deal with the some of the issues surrounding the episode. To start with, I neither liked it as much as some of y'all who loved it, not did I hate it, either. The human and Vulcan characters were pretty strongly developed, but my main complaint about the Andorians was that we actually learn next to nothing about them. The plot in this episode was better developed than in some others, though it had a couple of holes. The tech and sets worked very well.

More specifically:

1. Canon violations: There was nothing about the Andorians which violated series canon, that I could detect. It is really a pity that the writers didn't use the LUG material, but the episode could be broadly LUG compatible. The Vulcans, however, are beginning to develop into an ongoing credibility problem. Yeah, they don't violate STRICT canon by being deceitful and manipulative, but they sure violate the spirit of TOS, with its "everyone knows that Vulcans don't lie" mentality. There is also the little issue of the hidden, ultra-private Vulcan mating practices, which are now known to everyone.

2. "The Andorian Imperial Guard": Not a violation of strict canon, nor necessarily an indication that the Andorians have an empire. This could easily be the name of a terrorist group, maybe based on memories of Krotus' empire. If the Andorians do have an empire, then it might fit with the Technical Manual information, or not.

3. Andorian Violence: The Andorians were suitably violent, in my view. That were also paranoid is an interesting and not very believable addition to canon. Maybe the paranoia thing is pure prejudice on the Vulcans' part. They weren't all that tough in combat, but weren't that bad either. If they really are the elite Imperial Guard, this just became a problem. If they are just a bunch of terrorists and flakes, then not. The leather costumes were quite nice IMHO.

4. Dumth: Let's see, Andoria and Vulcan are near neighbors? Then why did the Vulcans put the sensor array on a distant world? DUMB! Archer comes out with information, then gives none, and the notoriously paranoid Andorians don't suspect he's up to something? DUMB! The secret, hidden sensor array doesn't have a lock on the door? REALLY DUMB! Humans smell so bad that Vulcans need nasal anaesthetic? COME ON!!! That Sarek must have been quite the odd guy, huh, to marry stinking humans twice.

So, there is my opinion. Mostly not bad, but a couple of uncomfortable moments, and four howlers. Only four howlers isn't all that bad for 21st century TV.........

With regards to statement #4 above, I don't think they're referring to the homeworld being "neighbors." From what I can guess from that episode, the Vulcan have explored and colonized beyond their own system. The same can be said of the Andorians.

Besides, we would have done the same thing too, build a long-range sensor array to monitor our neighbors. Of course we won't disguise it as a monastery.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Phantom
Guess I didn't miss anything after all. Pretty much new the array was there from the first it was mentioned and when the "monk" went with them armed it was verified...No surprise, like I said they need to come up with imaginative writting. Cardboard plot, cardboard villians...Cardboard show.

---

Not to be mean, but if you hate the show that much, why watch it? If I didn't like it I'd certainly find something else to do. Not a criticisim just an observation.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Diamond_Spear


Not to be mean, but if you hate the show that much, why watch it? If I didn't like it I'd certainly find something else to do. Not a criticisim just an observation.

---

I am rapidly approaching the point where I won't. The reason why I have watched till now is:

1) The pilot was a good opener, I was pleasingly surprised and I thought the other episodes would just as interesting.

2) When you run into a bad episode there is always next week. Well, Enterprise is a neverending search for hope of a good episode.

I have made the promise to myself that if this weeks episode follows what I have seen thus far, I will not be watching it next week onwards. As I have said "at least there are still two good sci-fi shows on TV" being SG-1 and Andromeda.

I was merely, as suggested by others, "giving it a chance." Well, I have and IMO it has failed.

OK, maybe TOS simply said only subspace communications were possible during the Earth-Romulan wars. And if you want to STRETCH IT, you can say the Romulans refused to communicate visually. But I don't think that's the common interpretation most fans took at the time it was said.

I don't think the writers considered it at all when deciding to have ship-to-ship visuals in Enterprise. I think they just decided to do whatever they wanted. They don't really care about whether or not they're violating canon. All they care about is writing stories they want to write about. Probably they wouldn't even include the main characters if they could get away with it. That's why Pocket Books had to emphasize to new writers that the novels need to be about the main characters, because many of them wanted to center their stories around special guest characters. In other words, they didn't really care much about Star Trek except to use it as a backdrop for their own stories. I get the same impression from the recent writers.

They could have made some of the visuals look a little less sophisticated. For example--the replicators look the same as the ones on TNG. Couldn't they at least have put covers on them like they had in Kirk's time? Covers could have been added and still have the replicators look more advanced than our current technology. The truth is, the set people just wanted to go with what they already had wherever they could. So this argument about "can't make everything look as bad as it did in TOS" doesn't wash. It's possible to make things look less sophisticated without them looking as bad as the '60s sets.

In fact, I think the current Enterprise looks sleeker than any of the previous ones, including TNG and Voyager! It has the sleekest, reflective metallic hull of any of the ships. Don't tell me they had to make it look that sleek to look better than the '60s Enterprise.

I also wish they would use the article "the" when talking about the Enterprise, as they did on TOS, TNG, and DS9: "the Enterprise," the "Defiant." Voyager started this slick "return to Voyager" junk and now they are continuing it with "return to Enterprise." This show is just a thinly veiled pick-up from where Voyager left off. It's not really an attempt to tell interesting stories in the context of the history of the Federation.

BTW, what is canon these days? Who said it has to be the TV shows? Originally Gene Roddenberry said so, and since Star Trek was his baby, it was generally accepted. But he's gone, and many of us feel that recent writers are not doing justice to his vision. Who says these writers inherited Roddenberry's "canon" license? Paramount? Are we letting legalities and FCC regulations govern the definition (some would say RE-definition) of Roddenberry's dream?

BTW, what is canon these days? Who said it has to be the TV shows? Originally Gene Roddenberry said so, and since Star Trek was his baby, it was generally accepted. But he's gone, and many of us feel that recent writers are not doing justice to his vision. Who says these writers inherited Roddenberry's "canon" license? Paramount? Are we letting legalities and FCC regulations govern the definition (some would say RE-definition) of Roddenberry's dream? [/B][/QUOTE]


Now I may be mistaken but I believe that Roddenberry officialy turned Star Trek over to Berman did he not?