Questions about the Cogentior

[justTripn]

Cool. Thanks.

[crystalswolf]

Anytime. I loved Alien Nation. The male pregnancy thing squicked me out though.

[justTripn]

I think the truth about interfering in culture other than your own lies somewhere between "Try to right all perceived injustices" and "Do nothing" You know the story of "The King and I"? It's very fictionalized, but it's based VERY VERY loosely on the autobiography of Anna Leonowens which I DID read. She was a British school teacher hired by King Mongut of Siam in the 1800s to teach English to his hundreds of children (by all his concubines.) Well, King Mongut was in fact a somewhat enlighened despot. He and Anna did seem to develop a kind of close relationship where he looked to her for advice or at least approval and she had all kinds of opportunities to be at odds with him and want to steer him in a certain direction. For instance, she helped him translate his letters into English, which put her in the middle of all questionable stuff.

Well, there is a scene in the movie "Anna and the King" which, if it did not actually happen, illustrates exactly the kinds of predicaments that DID happen, according to the autobiography. In the movie, the King has picked a new concubine who comes to live within the compound. She is torn away from her own lover, who continues to secretly see her after she is forced to marry the King (joining hundreds of other wives of the king). Well the new wife is caught with her old lover and comes under a death sentence. The king orders that she be beaten and then her head chopped off. Well Anna comes rushing in right before the execution, shouting to stop and that it is immoral. The king tells her "You don't know what you just did! Get out of here!" The sentence is carried out, then the king tells her all upset: "You FORCED me to kill her. I understand what you are saying and I agree. I was going to commute her sentence and you made that impossible by shouting at me in front of hundreds of people."

So she was able to have an influence but it was a balancing act. Also little Prince Chulalongkorn, heir to the throne, who she taught, was a VERY enlightened ruler who brought the country in the the modern era.

[Silverbullet]

Sorry to be late Thursay was travel day, Friday Phil was making a DVD for his mothers Birthday, Satuday was our 41st wedding Aniversary and today Daughter got off to a cruise to Mexico. So, now hereI am

Congenteer: For the vissan Female the Cogenitor was equal to the male. both were needed equally for conception.

Did the Cogeenitor have a gender? Well, if we accept that the Vissan Male and Female had a Gender similar to ours that would account for two Genders. If the Gogentor had either one of the symbols of gender it wold be either a male or a female. if it did not it wold have no gender but it would have sex since it was part of the Pregnancy process. (Provided an Enzyme)

Why did not the Two sexes simply manufacture the Enzyme? cutting out th Cogenitor? Simce they still used the ngenitor they could not. Other wise they would have gone to a doctor, got a perscription for the Enzyme, got a suppy and insturctions how to use it. NO Cognetor needed.

Why not MIlk the cogentior for the enzyme? Apparently that allso was not possible because they still used a Conengintor.

What does tha tleave us? the conenitor can only produce the Enzme when hooked up to the female during the coception process. Which makes the Congenitor even more valuable.

Since the Cogenitor cannot reproduce itself it means that the two Sexes will occasionaly have a Coneniitor child. Who takes care lf it? The other two sexes treat the cogenitor with either benign negletct or utter neglect. Is there a big Day Cre center for cpongenitor babies.?

"Sexual Maturity. Let us say the Male Vssan reaches Sexual maturity at 12 years the female at the same age. the it is rfeasonable to assume the Cogenitor will achieve it at the same age. who takes care of these cogenitors until they reach Sexual Maturity? They must be housed, fed, clotherd and medical care given. The Cogenitor cannot do it as they are uneducated and unproductive. What about aging? suppose the Cogenitor ceases to make Enzymes at the age of 65 but lives until 80 who takes care of them? Are they killed?

This is a hell of a waste of resurceds and also a wasteo f a productive assest that is not being used: the Cogenitor and thier minds. This is blatent stupdtiy.

Guilt. Trip is partialy guilty because he informed the Cogenitor abot what it had a right to and that it was as intelligent as the other two sexes.

Archer shares in the guil because he refused asylum to an intellligent sentient being who was being denied the basic right any being needs. He was too interested in any possiblle technology he might get from the vissans.

The two other Sexdes when Charles told them he was as intelligent as they were that he had rights to a name, education, etc. They simply told him tha the would not be given these things and that he would go back to being what he had always been, nothing. they shared in the guilt.

Charles bease he did not want to go back to that life and saw no hope for him/her. Charles did not want to contiue to help the other two so he jujst said to Hell with it and ended his life

There is plnty of guilt to go around. Trip does not bear sole responsibility.

Would the Vissans haved given Archer the Tehnology he wanted? Probably not. they may have had hteir own form of a Prime directive policy When Archer aske for some Technology the Vissan captain said no, your kind will discover it on hour own. so, I doubt if Archr woud have got the Technology he desired.

Did the Humans come away with no tehnology? Matter of a fact hey did. Trip. Was shown that some things were possible tha tis a big step. He was shown things, shown schematics. I am sure when he returned to Enterprise he went back to his quarters and downloaded everything he had seen and learned includng tyring to reproduce the schematics. Being a brilliant Engineer his mind would trhivve on this. He would eventaully develop some of ghe things he had been shown. so the Vissan Engineers untitinly Broke the prime directive of the Visssans and the Humans did get some of their technolgy.

Alll in all I cannot see the two sexes treating something so valuable and rare as the coginetor so casually . If one has a valuable piece of anything it is cared for stored and protected. The draining on the Vissans sysem by keeping the cogienitors unedcuated and unproductive and the waste of potentially productive members of thier society being euals is so stupid it defies all sense.

[Asso]

It's hard for me to make an intelligent thought (If I am able to have this sort of thoughts, by chance ) about this episode.
You know what I think of the way the Authors attempted to display alienity.
For me, that was an aborted way to push the spectators to have some kind of ethical questions.
Aborted, as I said.

[crystalswolf]

BTW, quickly off topic and just FYI but the episode SyFy showed today reminded me that both actors from Alien Nation had characters on Ent. Harris (George Fransisco) and Soval (Matt Sykes)

[Thot]

No, there isn't, except that the clues that are in the script suggest they weren't total assholes -- they took the Cogenitor with them to meet the Humans (and have ice cream), and when Trip wanted to meet it again, the woman said, "I'll see if it's awake." If you really think of someone as a tool, you wouldn't care one way or the other.

To be honest: This whole concept of the Vissians and their behavior to a third gender is so rotten in itself.
On the one hand the Vissians are so enlightened and advanced and at the same time they enslave, prostitute and indoctrinate 3% of their population?

I mean: It took Trip less than one day with some attention, a book to read, a watched movie, a round of Go and a tour of Enterprise to shatter the fundamental basics of the Vissian culture?! We are talking about showing respect, not brain-washing her!
I hope, I don't have to point out, how much something inside the Vissian culture has to rott to cause such a reaction: You can't seed, where's no soil!

One other thing: To count into your decision, if the aliens you meet are nice or not, is one of the most irrelevants aspects from my point of view.
It is a common occurance, that dictators have outstanding manners and a charming attitude at official meetings, what doesn't prevent them from committing atrocities at other moments.

And yeah, I was a little disappointed but not particularly surprised that T'Pol didn't call him out for being a blatant hypocrite. My remark about Rajiin was simply an example that I thought to be especially similar due to their respective roles in society - if one wants to, they could go back to the episodes before Cogenitor and pluck out numerous examples of Archer getting involved with alien cultures but it never blowing up in his face (because he's the Captain and this sort of thing never bites him in the ass.)

I think this all there is to say about this aspect!

So he is guilty of disobeying an order . . .

I don't know from where you are getting this. The best thing you can find that T'Pol said to Trip in this episode is: "Captain Archer hopes to develop a productive relationship with this species. It might be best if you kept your opinions to yourself."
That's it! An advise, perhaps something she expects from him, but not an order, let alone a direct one!
And considering the fact, that Archer has never ever listen to T'Pol's advises to refrain from interfering into other cultures, why should Trip act differently?


You can pick quite some episodes, where Archer deliberately interferes in other cultures/affairs ('Fight or Flight', 'Marauders', 'Judgment') and put the lifes of his crew in jeopardy with his course of actions or provoked interstellar conflicts. But if you simply start to compare Trip's behavior in 'Cogenitor' with Archer's in 'Detained', you have to see the similarities:

Archer's case:

Did the Suliban asked for his help? No, not until he convinced them otherwise.

Did he acted openly towards the Tandarans or diplomaticly? Well, you could point out, that after being taken captive Archer and Travis weren't very amused, but after receiving the news, that they were picked up in a military zone, as a species unknown to the Tandarans, during a war against an enemy, who can disguise himself very good, they should have been a little bit more open to Colonel Grant considering the circumstances. But NO: Archer evades Grant's question about meeting the Cabal at first and later keeps silent for no reason, although he could simply give them the information.
To be honest: In Colonel Grant's situation after finding out, that these two "explorers" have more to do with the Cabal than simply 'running into them' and refused to give any information, I would have acted the same way as he did.

Did others had to suffer negative effects because of Archer's act of interfering? Oh, yes: Look how Zobral in 'Desert Crossing' lured Archer and Trip down to the desert planet, because the 'famous ship Enterprise' is known for interfering in other cultures' business for a good cause and Trip gets nearly killed in the process.

Concerning Archer's accusation of Trip having 'Charles' blood at his hands: How many Tandaran guards got killed during the attack of the detention camp in 'Detained'? Did the Klingons in 'Marauder' simply stay away or isn't it far more likely, that they returned out of revenge and killed at least some of the workers, since the following time the workers don't have the back-up of Enterprise? Did Archer ever apologize for creating the scenario in 'Desert Crossing', which nearly killed Trip, in the first place?

And isn't Archer's refusal of asylum just as much cause of the cogenitor's death as Trip's part?

Why do I summ this up? For sure not to prove that Archer is acting like a hypocrite in the episode - I think that's common knowledge around here. Far more important is a phrase in 'Cogenitor', where Trip says to Archer: "I did exactly what you'd do. It's not like I had much choice." but Archer answers simply in disbelieve: "You did exactly what I'd do? If that's true, then I've done a pretty lousy job setting an example around here."

And that's the point where a good story concerning this episode should concentrate around: Archer's course of action inspired Trip's way. But the writers of the story simply turned it into a 'Trip hasn't listen clearly enough to Archer, because Archer has so much more thought about it and these cases are totally different ones, because the Vissian are nice people' thing ... I hope you can hear the sarcasm out of my words. :/

[Asso]

No, there isn't, except that the clues that are in the script suggest they weren't total assholes -- they took the Cogenitor with them to meet the Humans (and have ice cream), and when Trip wanted to meet it again, the woman said, "I'll see if it's awake." If you really think of someone as a tool, you wouldn't care one way or the other.

To be honest: This whole concept of the Vissians and their behavior to a third gender is so rotten in itself.
On the one hand the Vissians are so enlightened and advanced and at the same time they enslave, prostitute and indoctrinate 3% of their population?

I mean: It took Trip less than one day with some attention, a book to read, a watched movie, a round of Go and a tour of Enterprise to shatter the fundamental basics of the Vissian culture?! We are talking about showing respect, not brain-washing her!
I hope, I don't have to point out, how much something inside the Vissian culture has to rott to cause such a reaction: You can't seed, where's no soil!

One other thing: To count into your decision, if the aliens you meet are nice or not, is one of the most irrelevants aspects from my point of view.
It is a common occurance, that dictators have outstanding manners and a charming attitude at official meetings, what doesn't prevent them from committing atrocities at other moments.

And yeah, I was a little disappointed but not particularly surprised that T'Pol didn't call him out for being a blatant hypocrite. My remark about Rajiin was simply an example that I thought to be especially similar due to their respective roles in society - if one wants to, they could go back to the episodes before Cogenitor and pluck out numerous examples of Archer getting involved with alien cultures but it never blowing up in his face (because he's the Captain and this sort of thing never bites him in the ass.)

I think this all there is to say about this aspect!

So he is guilty of disobeying an order . . .

I don't know from where you are getting this. The best thing you can find that T'Pol said to Trip in this episode is: "Captain Archer hopes to develop a productive relationship with this species. It might be best if you kept your opinions to yourself."
That's it! An advise, perhaps something she expects from him, but not an order, let alone a direct one!
And considering the fact, that Archer has never ever listen to T'Pol's advises to refrain from interfering into other cultures, why should Trip act differently?


You can pick quite some episodes, where Archer deliberately interferes in other cultures/affairs ('Fight or Flight', 'Marauders', 'Judgment') and put the lifes of his crew in jeopardy with his course of actions or provoked interstellar conflicts. But if you simply start to compare Trip's behavior in 'Cogenitor' with Archer's in 'Detained', you have to see the similarities:

Archer's case:

Did the Suliban asked for his help? No, not until he convinced them otherwise.

Did he acted openly towards the Tandarans or diplomaticly? Well, you could point out, that after being taken captive Archer and Travis weren't very amused, but after receiving the news, that they were picked up in a military zone, as a species unknown to the Tandarans, during a war against an enemy, who can disguise himself very good, they should have been a little bit more open to Colonel Grant considering the circumstances. But NO: Archer evades Grant's question about meeting the Cabal at first and later keeps silent for no reason, although he could simply give them the information.
To be honest: In Colonel Grant's situation after finding out, that these two "explorers" have more to do with the Cabal than simply 'running into them' and refused to give any information, I would have acted the same way as he did.

Did others had to suffer negative effects because of Archer's act of interfering? Oh, yes: Look how Zobral in 'Desert Crossing' lured Archer and Trip down to the desert planet, because the 'famous ship Enterprise' is known for interfering in other cultures' business for a good cause and Trip gets nearly killed in the process.

Concerning Archer's accusation of Trip having 'Charles' blood at his hands: How many Tandaran guards got killed during the attack of the detention camp in 'Detained'? Did the Klingons in 'Marauder' simply stay away or isn't it far more likely, that they returned out of revenge and killed at least some of the workers, since the following time the workers don't have the back-up of Enterprise? Did Archer ever apologize for creating the scenario in 'Desert Crossing', which nearly killed Trip, in the first place?

And isn't Archer's refusal of asylum just as much cause of the cogenitor's death as Trip's part?

Why do I summ this up? For sure not to prove that Archer is acting like a hypocrite in the episode - I think that's common knowledge around here. Far more important is a phrase in 'Cogenitor', where Trip says to Archer: "I did exactly what you'd do. It's not like I had much choice." but Archer answers simply in disbelieve: "You did exactly what I'd do? If that's true, then I've done a pretty lousy job setting an example around here."

And that's the point where a good story concerning this episode should concentrate around: Archer's course of action inspired Trip's way. But the writers of the story simply turned it into a 'Trip hasn't listen clearly enough to Archer, because Archer has so much more thought about it and these cases are totally different ones, because the Vissian are nice people' thing ... I hope you can hear the sarcasm out of my words. :/

I wanted to quote all Thot said, because it's like if these assessments had came out from my mind (even if not expressed so well as Thot did)

[Silverbullet]

Trip jut did what Archer had done on other occasions. Archer blasts him for doing it.

" Don't do as I do. Do as I say"

[Hoshissis]

I think Trip did it, as he believed it was excactly what Archer would have done.
I think it was a learning curve for Trip. Archer had learnt from his previous interferences that they backfired - Sulibens in Detention, Trip nearly dieing in Dessert Crossing. This is why I think Archer was so mad with him, but his mistake I think is not involving Trip more in the discussions he had with T'Pol about these though.

[Silverbullet]

Don't really believe Archer learned a thing from his mistakes as he kept making them.

In North Star Archer saw a wrong being done to one part of the planets population so he intervened. T'Pol happily went along with it. That was no different than what Trip did in Cogenitor.

Archer never learned. that is why his chewing out of Trip was so hypocritiacal.

[Hoshissis]

Don't really believe Archer learned a thing from his mistakes as he kept making them.

Big damned mistake Afrcher made was bringing the Orion women on Board Enterprise but he did and then when he found out they were causing problems he did nnothing about it and fianlly one of the Orion women got to Kelby and he sabotaged the Engines.

So, no Archer never learned. that is why his chewing out of Trip was so hypocritiacal.

But wasn't Archer already under there spell from when he first saw them dance onboard their ship. Same with Rajin, who put him under her spell, before she ran away causing Archer to fight and save her. I'm not defending him, as Archer isn't my favourite character by far, but I don't think he was responsible for his actions on both of those occasions.

[Thot]

Don't really believe Archer learned a thing from his mistakes as he kept making them.

Big damned mistake Afrcher made was bringing the Orion women on Board Enterprise but he did and then when he found out they were causing problems he did nnothing about it and fianlly one of the Orion women got to Kelby and he sabotaged the Engines.

So, no Archer never learned. that is why his chewing out of Trip was so hypocritiacal.

Well, I have to give him credit too with the Orion women and Rajiin, since they were effecting him with their voodoo.

I think it was a learning curve for Trip. Archer had learnt from his previous interferences that they backfired - Sulibens in Detention, Trip nearly dieing in Dessert Crossing.

You and I share the notion, that we want to see this in Archer, but where is the actual event: Where did this learning happen?
Where is the situation, where he is suffering from HIS actions and realizes HE made a mistake?
Where does HE show regret/remorse/whatever about his actions?
Where is the turning point, where HE realizes, how high the prize of interference is, where he acknowledges it and let show some consequences at a later point?

You and I understand it...and Silverbulltet and Asso and nearly all the others in front of the view screen. But where is the moment, where we actually witness Archer enlightment, wherefrom he makes consequences for his own actions and sticks to a certain line?

Just look at the little exchange between T'Pol and Archer during 'Detained'
T'P: "Captain, I thought you decided not to interfere with our cultures."
A: "In this case, I'm making an exception."

What is this!? A bad joke!?

This is also the reason, why I like Archer in season 3 the most: His mantra is 'Whatever it takes!' concerning the weapon and the Xindi. And he really struggles with the moralic implications and it tears him from inside (look at the episode 'Damage' or later 'Home'). You can argue about the fact, if a Star Trek captain should be doing this or not. But the figure of Archer gained something, what he lacked in the two season before: sonsistency!

The situations, where Archer 'embraces the spirit of the Prime Directive' it is always detached from him, he stays uninvolved to it or he isn't responsible or he is responsible but there are no consequences for him:

For example in "The Communicator": Archer sees the problems of being nearly detected as aliens by the locales, but what are the consequences?
"No more visits on pre-warp planets" would be a start, but do you get something like this to see on the screen? NO

In addition: Where is this lesson he learned in the episodes 'Marauder' or 'Judgment'?

So in the end he gives the example of interfering with other cultures. And that's the thing Trip picks up, with the difference that in Trip's case negative consequences effected them directly, because they weren't far enough away already, to leave it behind out of earshot.

That's the real shame about the figure of Archer: You could let him struggle between interfering and non-interfering until he comes to a certain point where he stumbles/makes a mistakes/whatever and after that, he chooses a consistent approach: My God, why don't you let him be the one, who finally formulates the Prime Directive? You don't have to make it too obvious: call it 'the highest commendation' or 'the first rule' or something like that.

And that's also the shame about the episode 'Cogenitor': Instead of using it as final revelation moment for Archer, where he acknowledges the need of a rigid non-interference policy, because he realizes how his behavior could be taken as an example to simply interfere - making Trip's mistake as much to Archer's mistake caused by the latter's former decisions - they turned it into a "How stupid was Trip and Archer is soooooooooooo disappointed"-thing.

Just think about the possible interactions between Archer and T'Pol, where she points this mess out to her captain and Archer goes to Trip at a later moment to explain it...

I wanted to quote all Thot said, because it's like if these assessments had came out from my mind (even if not expressed so well as Thot did)

Ho... I take this as a compliment. *tries to be humble*

[Asso]

And that's also the shame about the episode 'Cogenitor': Instead of using it as final revelation moment for Archer, where he acknowledges the need of a rigid non-interference policy, because he realizes how his behavior could be taken as an example to simply interfere - making Trip's mistake as much to Archer's mistake caused by the latter's former decisions - they turned it into a "How stupid was Trip and Archer is soooooooooooo disappointed"-thing.

Well said!

[Silverbullet]

But with the Orion women and Rajiin they had to be brought on board in order for them to affect Archer. He was not affected when he bfought them on board but later. He had no excuse for either action. He was set up both times and he fell into the trap both times because he was not thinking as he should have. He was the CAPTAIN. Rajiin he may have had an excuse. She was a Slave trying to escape a cruel slave owner.

But the Orion women, no excuse. He knew he should not accept three females as a gift. He also knew that the Orions could not be trusted. Archer was very gullible.

Ever consider what might have happened if Trip and T'Pol not been successful in disloging the cable, shutting down the Orions Wrp drives and weapons? Instead the Orion ship towing the helpless Enterprise to the waiting Orion Mauraders? The Mauraders were the ones who transported nine off the Enterprise and were going to sell them as slaves. They would have 80 crewmembers to enslave and a nice Starship all their own to use as a lure to trap other ships they could then board, capture the crew and enslve them. All because of Archer.

Again T'Pol went along with both instances. But she jumped on Trip because he may have jeopadized Archer getting some Vissan Technology.