Thoughts on Koss?

[Rigil Kent]

My opinion of him solidified negatively with the almost snide, condescendingly way he referred to Trip as T'Pol's "human friend," as if Tucker were less advanced than the average sehlat. Plus, there's the whole blackmail thing - whether his parents were the driving force behind it (no matter how unbelievably illogical it was on all grounds), he went along with it almost eagerly. While I don't look at him as evil, I still don't much like him.

[WarpGirl]

I didn't think his tone of voice was snide, I thought he was probing to know what-was-what. T'Pol brought up Kali'fee NOT HIM! T'Pol's isn't exactly forthcoming with anyone about anything. And I don't think it was eagerness, so much as, he thought his parents were right. And why shouldn't he? For about six decades he was raised to believe this was right. And for the vast majority of Vulcans it IS right! Why blame him for that?

[Rigil Kent]

You didn't think his tone was snide. I did. You also liked VOY. I loathed it. You've also gone on record (repeatedly) as stating that you actually don't like Enterprise, whereas I do (even if I freely acknowledge that it is terribly flawed.) Apparently, you're okay with giving Koss a pass for blackmailing T'Pol into a marriage she clearly did not want. I'm not. She made it pretty damned clear in both this episode and with her refusal to cooperate in "Breaking the Ice," so the fact that he resorted to these underhanded tactics utterly and completely ruins any chance of me ever seeing him as anything less than slime. It isn't remotely relevant to me whether his parents were making him, they were Syrannites, or he thought they were right - he forced T'Pol into a marriage she had no desire for by using the well-being of her mother as collateral. Under no circumstances is that honorable or anything less than disgusting.

And yeah, I think T'Les was slime for putting her daughter through this crap as well. But that doesn't mitigate Koss' behavior in any fashion.

[WarpGirl]

And you have also said there isn't any evidence to clearly state what Koss' motives were. Maybe you don't think why a person takes actions matters. I do.

[Rigil Kent]

And you have also said there isn't any evidence to clearly state what Koss' motives were. Maybe you don't think why a person takes actions matters. I do.

In this case, his motives mean exactly squat. His actions are what are important. An extreme example here, but if I kill ten or fifteen children but have really good intentions for doing so, does it matter what my intentions were? No, it doesn't. Does it matter that I was driving a car with a dying friend in it and I was rushing him to the hospital when I lost control and plowed into the Girl Scout troop? Nope. Still doesn't matter at all. The only thing that does matter is that those children are dead. (That's one of the reasons I find those so-called "hate crimes" to be be ridiculous - why the hell should it matter why somebody killed a person? They're still dead. Try to punish people for mindset and you start heading down a dark path - who decides what is the right way to think? And what makes them capable of making that decision?)

Do I think Koss' intentions may have been pure? No, not really, but I can admit that it is possible. But even if they were, that's ultimately irrelevant. He used the threat against her mother to put T'Pol into a position where she was forced to give him control over her life. (Pretty close to the textbook definition of rape, even if there is no sexual assault involved. Yet. That comes later, when she's forced to attend to his PF despite thinking he's utter slime.) It doesn't matter a hill of beans to me if he was secretly in love with her (which I don't buy for a second), was secretly a Romulan sympathizer or agent trying to neutralize or suborn her (don't really buy that either, but it could have been an interesting twist), was a Syrannite trying to cover for what appears to be an ungrateful mother (given how quickly she excreted over the life T'Pol sold her future for so she (T'Les) could rush off into the desert and foment a revolution), or any one of a half dozen other reasons. His actions matter to me, not his reasons.

Granted, knowing his motivations would have gone a long way in me not seeing the entire marriage subplot as a lazy writer's crutch intended to avoid writing an actual Human/Vulcan romance, but again, not important.

[Silverbullet]

I believe too that the writers motivation has to be considered. Mike Sussmanwrote "Home" I think (hve to check) that he wrote e2 also.

Sussman was not a Fan of TnT. He was, however, a big fan of the Archer character.

Both Trip and T'Pol suffered at the writers hands. Trip being the Comic relief in the first two seasons. T'Pol realy worked over in the first three seasons. The only thing the writers didn't do was to have a Red Light outside the door of her Quarters. She ran around in her skivies wanting to jump anyones bones, was cold, a Witch, Druggie, a 13 year old, Temptress (Seducing Trip.) Home was more of the same. Trip got the shaft and T'Pol did too.

Sussmans episodes often made little sense at all. He seemed to use them as a club against certain characters. He could write well when he wasn't on a vendetta.

So the characters motivation iis a reflection of Sussman's motivation. Break up TnT for good and go from there.

[Rigil Kent]

Okay, I don't agree with that at all. Yeah, Sussman was an AinTer, but he wrote what he was told. Ultimately, the entire marriage plot is due to the decision of the executive producer for season 4 - Manny Coto, who was a TnTer - so blaming Sussman for it doesn't really make a lot of sense. I would go so far as to argue that all of the characters suffered from poor writing, although I thought Trip was the most well rounded.

[Silverbullet]

Coto wasn't the nly Excutive Producer of Home. Berman and Bragga are also listed as Executive Producers. I am not certain how much clout Coto realy had in Season 4. He didn't seem to have a free hand in Season 3.

[Rigil Kent]

Berman and Braga were basically promoted to "non-controlling" status in season 4. Coto was driving the series at that point, not B&B, so all of the major creative decisions were his. Except when they overruled him at the end with their inane "finale."

[Silverbullet]

Rigel, I defer to your knowledge. I am not that well versed in the Production end of Enterprise or of who was the Boss when.

I know that Coto wrote Demons but not Terra Prime which seems strange. I would think that he would have written both for continuity. Also there was a difference between TnT. In the Mine Trip says he is sick of the Bond and T'Pol says she doesn't enjoy it either. But in other scenes they are couple.

[Rigil Kent]

Well, that's not really relevant to the discussion on Koss, I think.

[aadarshinah]

I'm curious if the writer of "Home" wanted to do more with Koss but miscomunication and lack of continuity between writers never allowed that to develop....

[WarpGirl]

Why the hell should it matter why somebody killed a person? They're still dead.

Just for the record, I don't believe killing anyone is OK. However... Accidently running over a child is far different than beating someone to death because they're gay, black, white, Arab... Or whatever. The consequences shouldn't be the same. So yeah Motives matter. And if you don't intend to mow down innocent Girl Scouts, its hardly justice to be punished as a murderer.

Do I think Koss' intentions may have been pure? No, not really, but I can admit that it is possible. But even if they were, that's ultimately irrelevant. He used the threat against her mother to put T'Pol into a position where she was forced to give him control over her life. (Pretty close to the textbook definition of rape, even if there is no sexual assault involved. Yet. That comes later, when she's forced to attend to his PF despite thinking he's utter slime.)

I guess you think both Koss and T'Pol are lying when they both asserted the choice lay with her. If anything T'Les was the one who was taking choice out of the situation. Given the fact Koss released her, I doubt he would have forced her to satisfy his Pon Farr. Otherwise why bother???

It doesn't matter a hill of beans to me if was a Syrannite trying to cover for what appears to be an ungrateful mother (given how quickly she excreted over the life T'Pol sold her future for so she (T'Les) could rush off into the desert and foment a revolution). His actions matter to me, not his reasons.

I'm not trying to change your opinion. However, the history of the world and even the US (since it was origionally a part of Great Britian) hinges on a lot of marriages where the two parties can't stand each-other, lots of nations (and the good in them) wouldn't exist without them. I for one believe that if Koss and T'Pol's marriage contributed to the fall of the VHC, (and it did) then that is good enough to make up for the heartbreak. After all he did let her go.

[Rigil Kent]

However... Accidently running over a child is far different than beating someone to death because they're gay, black, white, Arab... Or whatever. The consequences shouldn't be the same.

Why? They're still dead. The example I posted was actually flawed (which I later realized - it would have been more a case of manslaughter rather than murder), so why should a bigot be punished more harshly than a sociopath or even your run of the mill murderer? Just because one person is a white supremacist or hates homosexuals doesn't mean their actions are any less evil or reprehensible than the guy who robbed the convenience store and shot the gay, black, Jewish guy running it because said clerk mouthed off at him. This whole "punish someone more harshly because of what they think" makes no sense at all to me and goes directly to thought police. Who determines what is okay to think? The consequences should always be the same: if you do X, then Y happens to you. Period. No exceptions. Doesn't matter if you are a foaming at the mouth bigot/racist/homophobe or if you just hated that SOB because he dinged your car. End result should always be the same. When you focus on the why, you lose track of the what. Who cares why someone hates another person? Let's focus on what he or she did.

The ironic thing is you seem focused on motivation here but are willing to give Koss a pass for a plot twist that is never explained in terms of motivation. We don't know why he suddenly and abruptly dissolved the marriage apart from the fact that it had served its purpose in terms of a Trip/T'Pol delaying tactic for the writers.

I guess you think both Koss and T'Pol are lying when they both asserted the choice lay with her.

How exactly was it a real choice? Marry me or your mother gets thoroughly screwed over. That's not a choice. That's an ultimatum. Sure, both of them can say that the choice was hers (and doing so totally tracks with T'Pol's apparent need for self-flagellation and taking the blame for the crap that is flung at her), but it isn't a real choice.

If anything T'Les was the one who was taking choice out of the situation.

And as I have said several times, I consider T'Les to be slime for putting T'Pol in this situation. But that does not mitigate the fact that Koss put T'Pol through this crap in the first place.

Given the fact Koss released her, I doubt he would have forced her to satisfy his Pon Farr.

And you totally missed the point of that remark. I was speaking about "Home" and the period of time then, not the sudden and inexplicable decision on his part to release her. While they were married, she was apparently obligated to satisfy his PF, despite loathing him, because of the fragile situation her mother was in. Failure to comply would lead to negative repercussions toward her mother (providing The Blackmailer survived somehow) which means he had all the power in the marriage.

However, the history of the world and even the US (since it was origionally a part of Great Britian) hinges on a lot of marriages where the two parties can't stand each-other, lots of nations (and the good in them) wouldn't exist without them.

I have a degree in History. I'm well aware of this fact. But it doesn't do anything to mitigate my general dislike of the Koss character in "Home" because of his actions (not his motivations, which are never properly explained so they actually make sense) or the utterly inane marriage subplot that was introduced solely for the purpose of avoiding an actual Trip/T'Pol relationship. Those same marriages you mentioned also had a common theme: both parties get something out of the marriage. In this case, we are never told what Koss or his family get (apart from their family suddenly being linked with that crazy, emotional, human-loving reprobate daughter of T'Les (who was responsible for that disaster at P'Jem, did you hear?), which has a negative impact on their reputation), so the whole thing rings false and feels exactly like the delaying tactic that it was.

[panyasan]

However, the history of the world and even the US (since it was origionally a part of Great Britian) hinges on a lot of marriages where the two parties can't stand each-other, lots of nations (and the good in them) wouldn't exist without them. I for one believe that if Koss and T'Pol's marriage contributed to the fall of the VHC, (and it did) then that is good enough to make up for the heartbreak. After all he did let her go.

The problem with this scenario is that's not what happened. They didn't tell T'Pol she should marry Koss because of political reasons/helping Vulcan/the fall of the VHC. It's a good explanation why Koss wanted to marry T'Pol, but he doesn't mentioned it. If that was the case, T'Pol may have seen more logic in marrying Koss. No, Koss simply said: marry me or your mother pays the price. If in Home the whole issue of the corrupt VHC was mentioned as part of the reason and T'Pol was also supporting the Syrannite case then the whole episode would have make much more sense. The Vulcan arc would be a good way to continue the story line of Home - which is not the case now. Also, she was involved with Trip at that time, which makes the situation very different. Futhermore, yes arranged marriages between two royal families were part of the building unions between two countries, but not always for the benefit of the nations involved, but a lot of times simple for power and money.