From: ph9991_manfr@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Riker in command
Date: 4 Jan 93 14:43:57 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin - River Falls

> 
>>No, I'm saying the job a person has will bring out different traits in a 
>>character, as we saw in "Disaster" when everyone had to do work they were
>>unaccustomed to.  
> 
> Uh... I didn't see that at all.

Surprise, surprise.

  Everyone seemed to behave in "Disaster" with
> the same character traits they've had all along (meaning, in some cases, they
> were pretty bland :-)  Thinking through the roster - Picard, Data, Worf,
> Riker, Dr. Crusher and LaForge - they all seemed to be roughly the same in
> that episode.
> 
Let me see now, Picard has to stifle his impatience with children and 
when he does this we find out he wouldn't be such a bad father after all.
Troi has to dig down and find backbone and make some command decisions
in a crisis situation.  
Worf has to be a Doctor!  And when he does so, he learns to his surprise
that it isn't as easy as he thought.  

Their basic characters remained the same, yes, but the facets of the
crystals were turned in each case to allow us to see sides that aren't
ordinarily brought out.
> 
>>If Riker were the Number One guy on the ship (pun intended), then he would
>>also get more attention from the writers and therefore his character will
>>develop more.
> 
> I tend to doubt it.  Data and Worf are both better developed than Riker (and
> arguably both are better developed than Picard, though they've royally screwed
> up Data's character over the past two years).  I think Picard has merited
> attention from the writers because of Stewart's acting abilities.  They just
> don't seem very interested in Frakes.

they aren't interested in Frakes because First Officer isn't such an
interesting position on a ship.  He's the chief bureaucrat.  He actually
does the nuts and bolts organization of the departments, and that doesn't
make for good drama.  Put him in the Captain's chair and development will
happen.  Right now he's a seed without soil and a pot. 
>>once his goal in life is met, i.e. command of a starship.
> 
> I find it har to envision a Riker more relaxed than he is now; he's positively
> MELLOW these days!

Don't have trouble with your eyesight do you?  This is the second time you
say you can't see something....

> 
>>True enough, but still its "flagship" title is in debate.
> 
> The TITLE is in debate?  In what way?  The Enterprise has *EXPLICITLY* been
> called the flagship of Starfleet at least twice!  What room for debate does
> that leave?

It's been called the flagship.  I do not dispute that.  What I wonder is
if this is an official designation in the mission logs and all that kind
of thing, or an honorary thing pegged on her by Starfleet personnel because
of her name, crew, and Captain.  I wonder this because the flagship business
wasn't mentioned at all in the first three years of her run.
> 
> Nonetheless, you're pulling things off track here; it's not the title that's
> important, but the ship's significance within the fleet, title or no.

True.
> 
> This issue has been debated extensively before on this newsgroup.  I recall
> some people pointing out that there are classes of naval vessels in the US
> fleet TODAY which are the only ships of their class.
> 
> While the existence of a USS Galaxy is implied in the class name (just as the
> existence of a USS Constitution was in Classic Star Trek), we don't actually
> KNOW if either exists or existed in the Trek universe.  It doesn't stretch my
> imagination at all to conceive that a class need not have a ship named after
> the class.
> 
> It also doesn't stretch my imagination to envision that Starfleet may lack the
> resources to construct additional Galaxy-class vessels, especially after the
> Borg encounter.

Why does it also stretch your imagination to go in the direction that has
been implied all along, that there are more Galaxy-class vessels?  

>>Because someone will be bright enough to see that Riker's only been waiting
>>on the Enterprise so that he will eventually get the Enterprise.
> 
> But why should they give him the ship, therefore?  There are surely
> better-qualified commanders.

There are?  There are other commanders who know the Enterprise inside and
out?  There are other commanders who have served on the Enterprise and
with her crew almost from her very launching?  
Making Riker the Captain makes the most sense because his transfer up to
the Captain's chair will be less disruptive than installing a new Captain
above him, therefore more efficient.  
I tend to think Jellicoe's appointment was intended as short-term, since
the Vice-Admiral specifically mentions his experience with the Cardassians
as the real reason she gave him the job.  If Picard had died, I don't
think Jellicoe would have stayed on much longer after the Cardassian
incident, but they went through the command ceremony in case the Cardassian
incident was going to turn sour and drawn out, in which case there would
be no time or need for the Enterprise to go on to other assignments.
There is also still the possibility that the Vice-Admiral was indeed a spy,
which is even perhaps likely given the unlikeliness of Picard's selection
for the mission.

> 
> -- 
> Michael Rawdon				  rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
> University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department,  Madison, WI
> ( Now in the Boston, Massachusetts area! )
> 
> "Beauty... survives."
> 				- James T. Kirk, "That Which Survives"

Steven.K.Manfred