Me too. They had much more chemistry than T'Pol/Trip. Also, she got worked up emotionally over Archer more often, like that one time she nearly smacks Tripone after he tries to stop her from following the Capn onto that Xindi thingy.
She was under the influence of trellium and a basket case. To suggest that she loved Archer under that circumstance is comparable to saying a person under the influence of PCP is a sociopath.
^^ If you discount any feelings she demonstrated toward Archer while under the influence of trellium, you would also have to discount any feelings she demonstrated toward Trip during that time. That would be from around "Similitude" all the way to after "Damage"? Neither one seems right to me. It makes more sense, IMHO, to look at the way T'Pol and Archer (and T'Pol and Trip, for that matter) regarded each other over the long haul -- including before the trellium, and after trellium. If Girl has feelings for Guy when sober, whether subtle or obvious, and then she gets roaring drunk and does some really over-the-top expression of those feelings, does that mean that expression during the binge wasn't real? Or does it mean that inhibitions were broken down during the binge, and she couldn't control the expression of those feelings?
Excellent points, DevilEyes! That's exactly how I feel about Trip/T'Pol. About "Acquisition", I wouldn't really call that 'subtext'. I think it was just something Trip came up with off the top of his head, kind of like Archer was making up his part as he went along. Middleman, that's also a good point about the novel, but quite frankly, I don't care. No offense, don't take that the wrong way, it's just my opinion, but I've always been one to 'ship' the strangest people and have never really cared what does or doesn't actually happen onscreen. I guess part of it is the fact that I enjoy AU episodes, books, and fanfic so much that I basically make up my own AU for a lot of shows. DevilEyes, I don't think Trip and Hoshi ever had much subtext at all. Like I said above, my ships aren't based on canon or subtext. I think Hoshi and Trip's personalities would have gone together better than Trip's and T'Pol's, that's why I ship them. There aren't even many moments of dialogue between Trip and Hoshi...'Observer Effect', a brief scene about Sluggo early in the first season, and a 3 second moment where Trip sort of playfully shoves Hoshi while playing basketball (can't remember the ep) are about it. Oh well. What else is fanfic for? PS Woohoo! I finally figured out how to make MultiQuote work!
Hey guy, no offense taken. I was just pointing out what I read, and conversely what I didn't read. You and/or anyone else can take pleasure in anything you want to. It doesn't matter if I may not quite understand it. As you said above, you don't care whether it happened or not! Hey ... That's why they call it entertainment! As for me, however, I'll stick to what I saw and read.
Everyone should stick to what ever entertains them. None of it is real anyway, so why make a fuss about what does or does not count? Some people ship Archer and T'Pol, sure. It never happened on screen, but that's hardly a reason for anyone to impose their preferences upon them. That being said, screw Rodney McKay, Sam and Jack will always be the one true pairing!
^Ha ha ha...Rodney and Sam...ha ha ha...seeing as my SG-1 shipping ideas have wrought some interesting replies, I won't mention who I think Carter should be with...although I've seen fanfic with even weirder ideas about who it should be... Yeah, so whatever floats your boat/engages your warp engines/dials your Stargate...okay, that's enough of that. Whatever entertains you. Canon applies to some things, but shipping shouldn't be one of them. The only show that has a 'canon' pairing that I agree with is Farscape, Crichton and Aeryn belong together, which kind of makes me ship Mitchell and Vala...
Would Archer have put up with her weaknesses? I think the real question is: would Archer have helped her to recognize/realize the best T'Pol she could be? And I think the answer is ABSOLUTELY! You ever know those people who manage to bring out the best in each other? I think those are the most admirable couples. To me, Archer consistently brings out the best in her and T'Pol consistently brings out the best in Archer. BeyondAntares, I think Archer is more complex as well ... but I still like Trip. I think the relationship between Trip and T'Pol, though, hurt Trip as a character. It made him mopey and whiny imo.
My six year old son and I were watching Enterprise today (where I live it's on 4 tines a day), and he said, "Trip is in love with T'Pol. T'Pol is in love with Trip. That makes sense." Even HE picked up on their chemistry, see!
Alright, I'm going to bust out the rarely seen feminist soapbox to proclaim my opinion on the Archer/T'Pol romantic relationship. For me, the rather forced development in Season 2 was bordering on TOS-style misogyny. Someone, I believe it was fanfic author Rigil Kent on the subject, quite accurately described T'Pol as Sidekick!Polly in the second season. She had very little development by herself, it's always in conjunction with her interactions with Archer. Plus, their relationship appears to be Archer showing how superior he is, while T'Pol hangs on his every word and agrees with all his actions. Archer clearly sees the Vulcan as a sexual being (if the Freudian slips are any indication), but as little else in terms of romantic interest. He never really bothers to dig deeper and T'Pol is just okay with that. Even though they have a full season dedicated to the attempted advancement of their potential relationship, they don't seem to have any further understanding of each other by the end of it. Needless to say, I can't say I prefer Archer/T'Pol. Not only did I feel a complete lack of chemistry between the characters, but the inherent deference of T'Pol to Archer rubbed me entirely the wrong way. Plus, if my reference to Rigil Kent's works didn't give me away, my loyalties lie elsewhere. Everyone is free to support what couples they like, so don't see this as an attack. Just my two cents worth and an attempt to liven up the discussion.
Well, Archer was the main character of the series, so characters like Trip were his "sidekicks" as much as T'Pol was. Second, T'Pol was under his command, so yes, she did show deference to him, as did all the crew. Third, I just don't see the misogyny. Any specific examples?
I think the Freudian slips are the only real indication that Archer is sexual being ... up until Home. He kissed maybe two aliens, outside of his dreams, and those were rather chaste. I don't know. In two seasons, they convinced me that Archer understood her on a level through mistakes (yes, he made some) and through being a good judge of character. By the end of season 2, not only has he changed his tune about "Vulcans," but he's incorporated their way of thinking into his decisions (like Cogenitor), enough that one of his own (Trip) questioned his decision. I think what Enterprise did more than anything was show two people building a friendship. *THAT!* is what leads me to think that the scenes in season 3 could be romantic.
^. I am also disappointed in the lack of seksy time for Captain Shirtless. But out of all the captains, I think he had the best flame/ former flame. I loved seeing the two starship captains working side by side. :two paws up:
I like the pairings of Archer/T'Pol just as much as Trip/T'Pol. T'Pol had undeniable chemistry with them both. When I want to "see" Archer/T'Pol I'll watch Twilight, Shadows of P'Jem or ANIS. If I want Trip/T'Pol, then it's Harbinger, Similitude, Home, Bound, Demons/Terra Prime, etc. That said Hoshi/Trip would've been interesting to see play out.
I don't see any misogyny. T'Pol is clearly a person struggling to find her place in her world. She is looking for direction. She KNOWS she sucks at repressing her emotions (her mother says this has always been difficult for her) and on this ship she gets to play the logical one and no one sees the cracks because they are humans. She is looking for leadership, for someone stronger to attach herself to who isn't going to pull her up all the time on her Vulcan flaws. Archer is that person. She is a weak person and he is a strong person who is oblivious to her real flaws by virtue of being a different species. It's just a relationship dynamic, not misogyny. I will venture to say that if you stuck T'Pol with Janeway she would have attached herself and gone along with everything in exactly the same way. There are some parallels between T'Pol and 7, they both struggle to embrace the ideals and demands of their species.
There is a huge difference between sidekick and subordinate, the latter of which needs to show obedience to the Captain's direct orders, not deference. There is a difference. One can question someone's decisions and present these objections, even if they must be obeyed. Look at the Kirk-Spock-McCoy dynamic in TOS. At the end of the day, they would obey a direct order, but they let Jim know exactly what they thought on the matter. A sidekick is there to boost the honor and glory of The Hero, while having very little development for themselves. That's really what happens to T'Pol in Season 2, where she's still as unsure of herself even after so much quality time with Uncle Jon. I'll get to the misogyny in a moment... There are parallels between those dynamics, but they end up being very different creatures in the end. For one, Janeway and 7 is much more of a parent/child relationship, as 7 lost hers at such an early age. More importantly, they were never being groomed to be in a romantic relationship by the writers. That is the difference that truly changes everything in terms of comparison. Yes, T'Pol is trying to find her way in the universe, but she is also not a particularily weak character, as we see in Season 1. She has trouble with her emotions and doesn't fit in, yes, but she did just fine for 60+ years. She is acknowledged as a competent scientist, she is not afraid to argue her points and she stands by her convictions until absolute evidence is shown against them. In fact, I find Archer to be much more vacillating in his decisions and weaker in his convictions. Since someone brought it up, Cogenitor is a good example of that. So, there is no basis that Archer is the stronger will for her to attach herself to. Also, her position is to stand behind him and cheer him on, she learns nothing. At least 7 recaptured much of what she had lost. Thus, the trick of the writers to suddenly make her the weaker personality in order to fit her into the framework of a romance with Archer is very misogynistic. She is his cheerleader and ego boost, not on equal grounds at all. After all, who doesn't want the sexy alien chick firmly and mindlessly in your corner? Apparently, I didn't clearly express myself in my first post and I apologize for that. I don't believe there is misogyny inherent in the relationship between Archer and his XO, but in how the writers went about it in Season 2. It just makes me very uncomfortable.