27

In the Voyager episode The Q and the Grey, Q wants to have a child with Janeway because there hasn't been a new Q in billions of years and he wants to mix up the Continuum (to save it). But this statement would seem to over look Amanda Rogers from True Q (TNG).

Is there a canon explanation for this conflict of facts, or was this merely an oversight on the part of the writers?

  • 1
    Trying to research this brings up WAY too many out-of-the-weird-corner-of-Internet fanfics. +1 anyway. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 30 '12 at 17:40
  • 8
    @DVK ....link? >_> – user1027 May 30 '12 at 17:42
  • 6
    @Keen - I shall most certainly refrain from being a party to disseminating such dreadful things as those. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 31 '12 at 3:01
16

From the synopsis of True Q that you linked to:

[Q] then reveals that Amanda is a Q, shocking everyone else. When Crusher claims Amanda's birth parents were Human, Q reveals they were members of the Q Continuum who had assumed Human form.

I can only surmise that since both Amanda's parents were members of the Q Continuum that in that case there was no introduction of the human DNA that he was looking for with Janeway.

This is further evidenced by:

...the real reason for [Q's] examination was to determine if Amanda was actually a Q or some sort of hybrid that would have to be exterminated.

He is sent there to make sure that she is not a hybrid but a full "Q".

From The Q and the Grey:

He then explains that he wishes to end the war by adding Human DNA into the Continuum and having a baby, something that hasn't been done before.

The episode does end with the "solution" being Q mating with a female Q, however it is not stated that this act of procreation had "never been done before" but rather that adding human DNA had not.

Edit: As pointed out by @bitmask in the comments, there also was a difference in the erm...mating procedures for the two "Q" children. Which may lead to Q's presumption that what he was wont to do had not been done before: E.T. and Star Wars are in the same universe but I don't think E.T. and Star Trek are, so the mating ritual was unique in-universe.

  • 3
    In addition to this explanation: It is reasonable to assume Amanda was conceived while her parents were in human form, using conventional human means. Junior however was conceived with the weird E.T. technique. So that should make a difference. – bitmask May 30 '12 at 18:03
  • 6
    The fact that having a child with Lady Q appeased Q's desire for a child makes me wonder whether the desire for human DNA was actual, or if mentioning that was simply Q attempting to appeal to Janeway and make her more amenable to the proposition. – Xantec May 30 '12 at 18:07
  • 12
    @Xantec ... new pick up line for the bars? "I desire the addition of your human DNA, it's never been done before." – NominSim May 30 '12 at 18:10
  • 4
    @NominSim: I see that line working very well for women, but not on women. ;) – gnovice May 30 '12 at 18:12
  • 4
    @gnovice That is basically the plot of Species – NominSim May 30 '12 at 18:13
6

To pull a quote directly from The Q and the Grey:

"Even if I wanted to mate, I wouldn't know how. It's totally unprecedented." - Q

"You'll figure something out. You are omnipotent, after all." - Janeway

"I need time to think about it." - Q

What has never been done before, was two Q having a child. Amanda Rogers' parents did choose human form, and conceived her as humans. And as we saw in Deja Q, the Q have no difficulty in becoming human.

There's even a quote from Q in True Q that supports this (emphasis mine):

They had assumed human form, in order to visit Earth, I suppose. For.. for amusement. But in vulgar human fashion, they proceeded to conceive a child. And then like mawkish humans, they became attached to it.

This is further supported in the series of (non-canon) novels The Q Continuum, where the female Q from The Q and the Grey states that Amanda Rogers "doesn't count".

So no, the Q didn't forget about Amanda Rogers. She just wasn't conceived of two Q.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.