Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:Briar Patch

37,449pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Same as that Klingon thing?Edit

Perhaps this has already been asked before, and since I havent seen the episode yet, I'm just asking: was it mentioned in the episode that that Klingon thing and the Briar Patch were the same? Ottens 15:55, 13 Nov 2004 (CET)

Assuming there is only 1 Klach D'Kel Brak, then yes. -- Harry 12:54, 15 Dec 2004 (CET)

Br'er rabbit== Wait a sec... You can't have it both ways. Either Br'er rabbit is canon and deserves a page on MA or it should be relegated to the indented italics. I don't know which it is or I'd do it myself. --Schrei 04:21, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Certainly canon, and it now has an article -- i reverted Platypus so that this article would link it. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 14:02, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Baku? The Augments?Edit

in the episode Ent The Augments they were to go to the briar patch and settle. i wonder if the baku were already there in this point in time, and could you imagine if the augments got the benifits from the solar radiation in the rings around the baku planet....would make for a good story line huh! Its Time For The White! =/\=Talk=/\= 18:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Q and the beltEdit

in TNG: Deja Q the other Q mentions something about the briar belt at the end when he is in the shuttle, wasnt paying attetion to what tho, need to pay more attention 8(

Insurrection and SoongEdit

Although I'm sure the writers intended for us to make the connection (you can almost sense the undelivered wink and smile by Spiner), in any realistic sense it is profoundly unlikely that the Briar Patch from Insurrection and Soong's Briar Patch are one and the same. For starters, (1) the Insurrection Briar Patch is a system-size phenomenon ... vessels at impulse can traverse it within a day or two, whereas the Soong Briar Patch is a vast region with gas and radiation from supernova remnants ... implying a multi-system size measured in the light-years. Further, (2) Soong indicates that the region shows indication of two habitable planets. He also says the Klingons haven't mapped it. This implies that remote sensing was employed, meaning they had to be able to get some readings of the planets from outside the region. The Insurrection Briar Patch prevented such methods. Perhaps most damningly, (3) Soong says that his Briar Patch has to be reached by going through Klingon space ... they were in/near Earth territory, later part of Federation space ... at the start of the trip. That's inconsistent with the Insurrection Briar Patch in undisputed Federation control. It also (4) seems improbable that an area controlled by the Klingons for over a century, fought for in glorious battle by Kor himself, would end up in Federation hands a century later. And, (5) it stretches credibility that the Son'a could've emerged from the Briar Patch and built a nearby nation on the backs of two subjugated species in an area that had been so contested by those two major powers, especially considering the later Son'a relationship with the Dominion. It's also worth noting that (6) a reviled criminal like Soong, who just happened to be the only survivor who would've known the name "Briar Patch" for the Klingon region, would've been an unlikely source for official nomenclature. Last but not least, (7) place-naming is an organic process. Many duplicate place-names exist just on this planet, and even just in the United States. Made in America by Bill Bryson, for instance, devotes a few pages to such issues, noting the frequent repetition of certain names by the settlers of the west. However, instead of just running with the above and unilaterally changing the page, I wanted to seek some community input first. - DSG2k 04:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's a big argument. The only one I can answer off the top of my head is 5: The Son'a didn't emerge from the Briar patch, the Ba'ku went there when they left their homeworld (which the Son'a then used as their base of operations, presumably.) - AJ Halliwell 04:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
That could be the way things went, yes, though all we know for sure is that the Son'a involved in INS were former residents of the Briar Patch planet. Speaking of which, I forgot to note in the above that Soong's mention of a second habitable planet in the Briar Patch largely undercuts the plot of Insurrection, which was focused exclusively on the Ba'ku planet. Had there been another in the system, some of the potential dispute within the Federation could've been averted. Further, I neglected to complete my #7 thought: A well-known literary name like "Briar Patch" would apply both for a hiding place and for an impenetrable/dangerous spot, both of which could very well end up used repeatedly by spacefaring human travellers. (One can readily imagine the Badlands being called "Briar Patch" by the Maquis, for example.) - DSG2k 04:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, um... since it was the writer's intent that the two Briar Patches were one and the same, I think we should just go with that. Any number of things could have happened between the mid-22nd century and the late 24th to account for all those apparent inconsistencies. For one thing, Klingon space from one century to the next is certainly in question (ever wonder why it only took four days to reach Qo'noS at Warp 4.5 in 2151 but would take quite a bit longer at the same speed in the 23rd and 24th centuries?), so it's certainly possible that the region somehow fell into Federation hands by the 2370s. It is a wonderful, well-written argument, but unlike the Briar Patch of the 22nd century being the Briar Patch of the 24th century, it's also speculation. It might be suitable for background info (if shortened). But again, great argument. :) --From Andoria with Love 04:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Do we have a source for the writer's intent, or is that just the general presumption? I'm not trying to be a butt; I'm just curious. I've seen writer's intent presumed (and even just plain manufactured) before when there wasn't intent at all. I'm sure that's not the case here, of course, but a source never hurts. - DSG2k 16:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the arguments here against them being the same don't really add up, given the 200 year gap and the fact that neither source was very specific about what the place was made of.
  1. System-sized Briar Patch - was it specified to be system sized in Insurrection? - no - you've just assumed this. For all we know, the Baku system is close to one edge, and there are further depths to it -- The 1701-E traveled from the entrance, to Baku, and back again. There was no reason to assume that if they had kept going past Baku, they wouldnt have found the expansive reaches Soong did. Just because they didnt go there, doesnt mean it isnt there.
  2. Implication of remote sensing - Just because the Klingons didn't map it, does this prove that no one else has? of course not.
  3. Only reached through Klingon space -- Even if you want to remain blissfully ignorant of the fact that the Federation and Klingons fought several wars and traded territory back and forth in each, there is also the fact that the Insurrection entrance could have been in an area that was never Klingon space, since the Federation obviously hadn't claimed any space at all in the 2150s, having not been founded. Possibly, no one at all had ever been close to the Baku edge in the 2150s, or by the time of Kor's battle.
  4. See above -- Captain M.K.B. 17:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Regarding those points you've given responses to, (1) the Briar Patch size is not an assumption. You'll note from watching the film that stars and black space are visible beyond the planet (and some Briar Patch soup) in our first view of the Son'a command ship. Further, Picard slows to 1/3rd impulse when preparing to enter the phenomenon, and the exterior visual of it clearly does not show a vast phenomenon. Had it been light-years across, it would've filled the screen if Picard intended to reach it in any logical amount of time at 1/3rd impulse. This contradicts the suggestion that the day trips to the edge of the ST:INS Briar Patch were undertaken merely because that was the closest exit point. If anything, it makes the INS Briar Patch akin to the Mutara Nebula from ST2. As for (2), I don't understand your response. If it was mapped by mystery people then there would be no point in Soong noting that it had never been mapped by the Klingons. Besides, how would Soong have obtained a map of a point beyond Klingon space which the locals haven't even mapped? It makes no sense and requires all sorts of extra presumptions. As for (3), I do intend to remain blissfully ignorant of the several wars between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. You're ignorant of them, too, because there is absolutely no evidence of "several wars" between the Klingons and Federation, and certainly no evidence of the Federation ever conquering non-border sectors that would've been beyond Klingon space centuries prior. It's also of interest (8, if you will) that the INS Briar Patch is in Sector 441. Not counting a Voyager oddity, 4xx sectors (like 21xxx sectors) are indicative of areas near Cardassian space, which makes sense given the Son'a manufacture of Ketracel White. In short, neither the original assumptions nor the attempted justifications for having both be the same simply don't work. - DSG2k 22:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Just popping in to respond to that last comment (#8, I guess) to say that it's not unlikely that the NX-01 Enterprise was in or near Cardassian space in the 2150s, since they had visited a planet previously visited by the Cardassians in "Observer Effect". Okay, random message complete. Have fun! :D --From Andoria with Love 23:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I have executed the change to remove the INS-Briar Patch / Klach D'Kel Brakt fan inference. In the meantime, Jörg has placed a query on Mike Sussman's talk page in order to get an answer regarding writer intent. However, my understanding is that reported writer intent constitutes a type-3 Restricted Validity Resource according to Memory-Alpha's canon policy, and that such material must appear in the background information for the entries. As such, canon material cannot be overruled by it, and so the two must remain separate barring a future reference to them being one and the same in future Trek. That said, I await Sussman's response so we can see what to put in the background info section of the pages. Thanks! - DSG2k 12:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK. So now we're separating objects that use the same name, basically the same description and a similar design if it wasn't specifically stated that they are indeed the same thing? That's cool - let me just lean back and watch that show... The discussion above doesn't seem to have any final outcome, btw. -- Cid Highwind 12:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Before I leave, I'd like to point you to this reply by Mike Sussman concerning the identity of the Briar Patch from Insurrection: User_talk:Mdsussman#Briar Patch/Klach D'Kel Brakt. --Jörg 17:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
That does confirm author intent, if even on a bit of a "goof" level, based as it was on information that did not appear in ST:INS and which other elements of the finished film contradict. I am making the appropriate notation in the background sections of both pages. Thanks to all! - DSG2k 19:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, guess I'm not seeing where I "goofed". I have to say I take issue with the new "background" info under the new Klach D'kel Brakt entry. You added:

When writing ENT: "The Augments", episode writer Mike Sussman based Arik Soong's "Briar Patch" on cut descriptions of the Briar Patch from an early script of Star Trek: Insurrection. However, the details of the two are quite distinct in the finished works.

You may feel they're quite distinct, I happen to disagree. Strongly. Personally, I think the original Briar Patch entry was more accurate (although it did contain the inaccurate statement that the cloud was in Klingon space in the 22nd Century).

I mean no disrespect, but I believe you made a lot of specious points in your various arguments. You wrote:

"The Insurrection Briar Patch is a system-size phenomenon"

Gotta say I disagree. There is no on-screen evidence that the Briar Patch (in Insurrection or "The Augments") is restricted to one star system. Piller apparently intended it to be larger in his final draft script, and I remained consistent with that in my script. I don't believe that the fact you can "see stars" through the cloud in the final film means the Patch must be no larger than one solar system.You further state:

"It seems improbable that an area controlled by the Klingons for over a century, fought for in glorious battle by Kor himself, would end up in Federation hands a century later."

The Briar Patch was never a part of Klingon space in "The Augments" -- it was specifically stated to be on the far side of their territory. Soong's line at the beginning of scene 28:

"Once we're safely through Klingon space, we'll set a course for these coordinates. The Klingons call it Klach D'kel Brakt... I call it the Briar Patch."

I made this clear in dialogue to deliberately avoid any conflicts -- actually, the Patch could've been very far beyond Klingon space. To me, there's no conflict with the Federation controlling the region two hundred years later as it was never the Klingons' to begin with. Moreover, Kor never said his battle was for control of Klach D'kel Brakt, he simply indicated the battle was fought there. Was the Battle of the Bassen Rift in Nemesis fought for control of that rift? Of course not.

• I agree it might seem "unlikely" for the Briar Patch to have been named by a criminal like Soong. For all we know, his name stuck and its origin was lost over the centuries. And maybe it wasn't the "official" designation after all. In Insurrection, the Admiral says, "They're calling this whole area the Briar Patch," which to me sounds like it may be an unofficial moniker. If a little girl can suggest the name for Pluto, I think Soong can suggest the name of a gas cloud.

• There are plenty of good reasons why 22nd Century Klingons hadn't mapped the gas cloud: 1) as already stated, it wasn't in their territory and was quite possibly many light-years away. 2) It's a big dangerous cloud, perhaps the Klingons assumed there was nothing useful inside of it. I think it's likely Soong's map came from the Orions or some other enterprising species.

Just some thoughts. I never have a problem if someone simply doesn't like my work, but if I'm accused of making a "goof"... well, that warms up my Irish blood.

For my next magic trick, I'll show how to reach Kronos in four days at low warp. Oh wait, I haven't figured that one out yet. Mike Sussman - VOY/ENT Writer-Producer 21:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, perhaps there were two Qo'noSes - why don't we just split that page in two? ;) (OK, OK, don't hit me all at once...) -- Cid Highwind
Mr. Sussman, I have the utmost respect for your work, most especially with "Twilight" et al. And further, your comments on your talk page about enjoying these sorts of discussions so long as nastiness is avoided were grand. However, I must take issue with your somewhat less than non-nasty tone and "warm[ing] of my Irish blood". You yourself used the term "goof" and when you brought up the other Trek "astronomical goofs" when responding to the issue at hand. Perhaps it was not your intent to imply that your link of the Insurrection Briar Patch with Klach D'Kel Brakt was such a goof . . . but then even the best writers and producers don't always have things turn out the way they intend. Which is, of course, the matter at hand.
I have already discussed the many reasons why the two cannot be the same in an in-universe sense, and the only answers which have been given by other users have been wildly implausible, inconsistent, and/or required us to believe all sorts of extra wars that never happened. Others simply attempt to apply a slippery-slope idea to a very specific and well-reasoned point. (Regarding the in-universe perspective, to reply to Highwind in a similar tone, the discussion was over, and indeed the matter was settled as soon as I took the field.)
Regarding the first of my points, I have even uploaded a new picture of the Enterprise-E approaching the phenomenon at impulse power, a journey which would take decades according to the view that both are one. Unlike the view of the Delphic Expanse we get in "The Expanse" of the same name wherein we're told a distance from the phenomenon, a speed, and how big it is, there is no cause to try to rationalize the Insurrection Briar Patch view except to support a view contrary to what the image clearly shows. Piller may have thought it larger in early scripts, but in the end that isn't what we, the audience, get to see or hear about.
Further, I note that you reply to arguments of mine which I did not make and never supported. I was the one who pointed out that Klach D'Kel Brakt was not in Klingon space in 2154, for instance . . . it was integral to my point of where it lay . . . and yet you respond as if this will come as a surprise to me. I can only assume either that I was not carefully read or else that my own author intent didn't shine through. C'est la vie.
I do find your use of the Battle of Bassen Rift curious, since that battle supports what I'm saying. That was a battle which occurred along the border regions between the two involved powers. Similarly, the 2271 battle would've logically occurred near a border region between the Klingons and Romulans, and ... given the Klingon victory, canonically-known Klingon expansionism in the 23rd Century, and the very name of the thing as referenced even in DS9 ... it follows that Klach D'Kel Brakt was controlled by the Klingons around the time of the battle, and presumably long afterward. Sure battles between powers don't always occur in neat little border zones . . . witness the skirmish for Gomtuu in ill-defined territory . . . but that is the most likely occurrence. Combine that with the fact that it was beyond Klingon space from Earth-explored regions in the 2150's, and it makes no canonical sense to conclude that the Federation would possess it (or that the Son'a would risk running a ketracel white trade when surrounded by Dominion enemies). The Klingon Empire wasn't carved up like Nazi Germany and Klach D'Kel Brakt isn't West Berlin. While wild and crazy territory-swapping might seem an ideal solution to this flimsy dilemma, the fact is that the only known instances of territory-swapping have been on border regions . . . refer to the Federation-Cardassian treaty and colonies like Dorvan V, or the Klingon/Federation trade of the Archanis sector. That's because that's the sort of territory-swap that makes sense. Israel didn't take the outskirts of Tehran as their security zone ... they took border regions.
In short, the only two ways to derive the conclusion that the two are the same is to (a) do so without bothering to think about it, or (b) start with that conclusion in the first place and start making rationalizations to try to support that conclusion. With the exception of your say-so, we have no need to try to shoehorn the two into the same definition. The pleasure of this sort of thing is applying critical thinking to a silly subject . . . your joke about the four day trip to the Klingon homeworld is just such an instance where we have cause to apply critical thinking. (And I have. It's what I do.)
Now, since the idea of the two being one is what you had in mind when you wrote it, you're certainly at liberty to jump through the required hoops when the hoops are identified as they have been, and anyone who prefers author intent over canon can do the same. And I'm sure that with the weight you bring to the table, canon policies such as Memory Alpha's will crumble and the unwise, counter-MA revision Shran/From Andoria with Love mentions below will occur and be maintained even if I undo his revision. Sure you're a "restricted validity resource" and don't override the canon we all see and hear by the local rules, but that's not important. (Of course in my rulebook you could probably simply declare contradictory elements non-canon and be done with it, a la your "soft canon" comments, but that's neither here nor there.)
But canon policies, whether my site's or MA's, are based on the episodes as aired. It's great to have you around to know what you were thinking ... oh if we could've had Coon around ... but just as Ira Behr and company knew (especially after the last shot of DS9's fifth season), writers and producers don't work alone. Each episode is the product of many talents, and sometimes what the writers want and intend just doesn't appear on screen. Sometimes it doesn't even appear in their own final draft. We can lament the loss, but in the end it's gone, and only what we have on screen remains. It's a bit more complicated than the old saying Spiner quotes of "if it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage", but the idea is similar.
So, do with it what you will. But the simple fact is that there's no reason to conclude the two are the same in-universe, many reasons to conclude they aren't, and even the local rules for determining Trek "reality" side with my position. But as the saying goes, "if the facts are against you, argue the law ... if the law is against you, argue the facts ... if the facts and the law are against you, yell like hell."
Highwind, et al., that's your cue. I've made my point. - DSG2k 22:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

DSG2k -- I regret if my quoting of the word "goof" or talking about "Irish blood" was interpreted as nasty -- that wasn't my intention. I appreciate your passion for Trek and its universe. I want that universe to be as real as possible -- I want to believe in it. Hell, I want to live there -- or at least visit for a while and pick up a couple of phasers.

It bugs me when TPTB get the details wrong -- the Enterprise journeys to the center of the galaxy in a few days, for example (don't mean to pick on Star Trek V, that's way too easy). For me, stuff like that undermines the reality of Trek universe. That's one of the reasons I was always careful about getting the science and the details correct when I was writing for Enterprise. I care about this stuff. Why else would I be posting here? The show's long gone.

I agree with you completely that what's on the film or TV screen should override a writer's intention. It was probably Harve Bennett's belief that Kirk's Enterprise was 20 years old in STIII, but anyone who's seen "The Menagerie, Part I" would probably have to disagree with the writer's "intention" in that instance.

Regarding this current discussion, I think we're simply going to have to agree to disagree. I believe that what's on screen validates my point of view -- you believe it validates yours. I'm content to leave it at that.

By the way, I appreciate your nicely researched and well thought out article on the Enterprise chronology. There were many, many distance/speed goofs in our show (and the other series, too). I think you did a very nice job of reconciling and/or explaining them. I appreciate that's all you're trying to do here.

Peace, Mike Sussman - VOY/ENT Writer-Producer 23:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


Wow... okay, I'm going to go ahead and revert all those changes based on Mike Sussman's replies in the next few hours. If anyone has a problem with that, I suggest ya'll bring it up here before then, but from what I can tell, it was the writer's intent that the two Briar Patches be one and the same so there's not really anything more to see, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 20:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, and it shouldn't have been changed without community consent. (All I saw and personally posted were oppositions and complaints I seem to recall) I suggest reverting them now, and I would have suggested it even without Mr. Sussman's generous help. "Um, hi, I was wondering - is the briar patch the same things as...well, ya know, the briar patch." With this logic hundreds of articles would be screwed up. Maybe Riker served on two Pegasus'? After all, we only saw it once - and I think a different icon was used in "Second Chances." - AJ Halliwell 21:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, splitting the page was a tad presumptuous, especially after numerous arguments, and an admin (Cid Highwind) entered the discussion and declared "The discussion above doesn't seem to have any final outcome, btw." --having been prt of that discussion, I agree.. having read Sussman's own comments, i have to say, i lean towards my earlier points. how do we justify splitting up the page when there are so many objections to doing just that here on the talk page? -- Captain M.K.B. 23:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

StarWars Reference? Edit

I remember some old (pre-2000) games from LucasArts (I guess it was Dark Forces) that features a "Briar pistol". ok...Googling...There you go: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Bryar_pistol

It is spelled differently, and it is the common name for a thorny thicket. So no. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:46, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki