Skip to main content

star trek - Why do the Klingons in Into Darkness have cranial ridges?


To the best of my knowledge the (in-universe) explanation for why the Klingons didn't have cranial ridges in TOS was because of a genetic disease caused by attempts to manipulate Klingon DNA to create augments (like Khan):



In the year 2154, the Klingons gained access to the genetic material of Human Augments and tried to adapt this genetic engineering to improve themselves.... One of the subjects suffered from the Levodian flu, which was modified by the Augment DNA to become a fatal, airborne, mutagenic plague that spread rampantly through the Empire, from world to world. In the first stage of this plague, Klingons lost the ridges on their foreheads





However, I recall seeing in the episode chain of Enterprise where the Klingons became infected with the virus, that the augmented children that the Klingons based their research on were augments from Khan's folk.


The scientist who leads the augments is Dr. Arik Soong (an ancestor of Dr. Noonian Soong, Data's father). Now if these children were augments then, in the prime timeline, Dr. Arik Soong likely found them aboard the Botany Bay and took them for safe keeping. However in the Abramsverse the Augments are likely under section 31's control and so would be kept under guard on earth, meaning that the Klingons wouldn't experiment with genetic research. Therefore everything is fine then? No.


Because the Augment virus ravaged the Klingon population prior to the U.S.S Kelvin's fateful encounter with Nero, then the Klingons (or the majority of them) should still have disease-ravaged heads in Into Darkness.


So how/why exactly do the Klingons in Into Darkness have cranial ridges?



Answer




Many millions — but not all — of Klingons were infected by the augment virus (ENT "Divergence"), and so a reasonable (but unconfirmed) in-universe theory would be that the Klingons in Into Darkness were descendants of those who were not infected.



ANTAAK: I suppose this is what I deserve. Millions of my people will have to live with this disfigurement. It'll be passed on to our children. Life won't be easy for us.




The words of the Klingon scientist Antaak imply that not everyone was infected. Also, we should take into account that we had never seen Qo'noS in TOS. The Klingons in Into Darkness were encountered on the homeworld itself, where one expects to find a greater diversity of Klingons.


All of that being said, one of the film's writers, Bob Orci, used to frequent the TrekMovie news site (before he famously lost his cool with Star Trek fans). In the lead-up to Into Darkness, he said




  1. boborci - June 3, 2012


So in our universe, they still have ridges, whether they are in the sequel or not;)



(Source)


I interpret this as saying that they were explicitly retconning ridge-less Klingons from TOS and the genetic augment virus from Enterprise.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...