StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I think in some ways this speaks to some flaws of the next gen of Trek. So many of the charactrers came out of Next Phase. Ricker -- Decker. Troi -- Ilia, Xon -- Data.

With Riker and Troi they just changed names, aand made a new species for Troi to be. It was still a potentially interesting idea.

But with Xon, a Vulcan achieving the pinnacle of logic, then looking back and seeing his lack of understanding emotions hindering his service to Starfleet... it has potential and was a very different take on a Vulcan.

But with Data, they figured make him a mechanical that wants to be a real boy (from Roddenberry). But as they built him up they kept showing more in him, then saying he was an emotional blankslate. Back and forth.

With Xon you had a character that would have struggled to face the fire, then possiblly bring it out in himself again. It would have been a internal struggle. But with Data its a matter of software.


And when I looked at Data over the years it always bugged me that he was crtiicized for having, and felt he had, no emotions.

For a very specific human point of view it was true. But what about for a lifeform as complicated and intricate as he was? If he had not been brainwashed by Starfleet maybe he would have looked internally and considered all his ethics, his priorities, and what, on consideration, mattered to him and come to realy appreciate his own sensibilities. He missed people when they left or passed, he had a desire to acheive a command, have deeper relationship, was awkward about certain aspects of his "biology" and history (sex, etc.), "enjoyed" friendships, and he had off duty passions. Yeah, he didn't just laugh out loud, or cry, or act all human. Why narrow himself to that, because Soong wanted it ?

Poor being, left his entire life trying to live up to his dad, his rescuers, and his captain.

Now that I think of it, it would have been interesting to write Data as a character that had no emotions and had no interest whatsoever in emotions. He would just be a machine which has rules hardwired into it from its creator.

Vulcans aspired to this but never achieved it, and in fact never came close. They still had moral values, wants, desires, etc. But a truly unemotional being would be interesting. It would never hesitate, never concern itself with any moral issues that weren't handled by its programming rulesets, and the only time it got confused would be due to a contradiction between some of its rules, thus leading to Asimov-like dilemmas.

Darth Wong wrote:Now that I think of it, it would have been interesting to write Data as a character that had no emotions and had no interest whatsoever in emotions. He would just be a machine which has rules hardwired into it from its creator.

So even though he was supposed to be the Spock replacement and thus was derided for this, he in fact could have been his own character instead of a Pinocchio?

I agree, but this idea would require that at least off-camera, those rules be written out clearly, if only to prevent the writers from going completely OOC to hack out cliches.

Vulcans aspired to this but never achieved it, and in fact never came close. They still had moral values, wants, desires, etc.

I believe this is indisputable; wasn't this "imperfection" a plot point on multiple occasions?

But a truly unemotional being would be interesting. It would never hesitate, never concern itself with any moral issues that weren't handled by its programming rulesets, and the only time it got confused would be due to a contradiction between some of its rules, thus leading to Asimov-like dilemmas.

I do like this take. Not necessarily for the Asimov-like dilemmas idea, though, but because some of the situations that required a "hardass" instead of the more empathic characters that were the norm on TNG... is it just me, or would have a totally unemotional Data actually work for those?

*remembers the infamous Hugh* Just wondering if "Riker should have overriden Picard!" would have worked better with Picard vs. unemotional Data... but IMO the rules for Data would have to be clearly written out beforehand to determine just HOW he would take it, since I could actually see it going a number of different ways based on what rules he's hardwired with.

I believe this is indisputable; wasn't this "imperfection" a plot point on multiple occasions?

As stated several times, Vulcans do have emotions, they just try to oppress them. Pon'Farr is proof enough that it's an act rather then an actual emotional purge.

Metrion Cascade wrote:"But you see, Data, you already are a real boy..."

I think Tasha Yar may have said something similar to that.

Darth Wong wrote:Now that I think of it, it would have been interesting to write Data as a character that had no emotions and had no interest whatsoever in emotions. He would just be a machine which has rules hardwired into it from its creator.

Vulcans aspired to this but never achieved it, and in fact never came close. They still had moral values, wants, desires, etc. But a truly unemotional being would be interesting. It would never hesitate, never concern itself with any moral issues that weren't handled by its programming rulesets, and the only time it got confused would be due to a contradiction between some of its rules, thus leading to Asimov-like dilemmas.

I don't know if you saw "I, Robot," but I thought VIKI's interpretation of the 3 Laws was sound - albeit with disastrous results.

In Data I saw the closest thing we got to a "religious" character in Roddenberry Trek. Essentially he was a devotee of Homo Sapiens (appealing to Roddenberry's humanism). Always wishing to be like them, never quite reaching his goal. Constantly questioning, misunderstanding, even rebelling at times, but eventually returning to the "living gods" that surround him all the time.

Intentional or not, I really appreciate the character for that. Otherwise he's just the generic 80's "I do not understand these strange customs, you must teach me these mundane things even though I am superior" fish out of water alien/robot cliche.