Reasons why Archer is never mentioned in history

[Nyotarules]

Ok if this topic has come up before I apologise, but any fun reasons why Archer is never mentioned in Star Trek history (ignore the real life reason) and add to the post above you!
Cheers

1. His existence was wiped out by another temporal cold war, on the night of his original conception, dad Henry Archer got drunk and no nookie took place.

 

[Tenacity]

There's a planet named Archer, but not automatically named for ENT's Archer.

 

[Christopher]

How often in your everyday life do you mention John Paul Jones or Captain James Cook? People don't constantly go around talking about historical figures, unless they're historians. So this doesn't even need to be a question.

 

[Damian]

He is mentioned in books that were written after Enterprise, and of course there was the mention of Archer in Star Trek (2009). Was he mentioned at all in Discovery?

So I'd say he's got shout outs since the series aired. But otherwise I figure Christopher is right from an in universe explanation. Unless you are reminiscing about a historical event, it's probably not something that's foremost in your mind.

Even when you watch TNG, DS9 or Voyager, how often is Captain Kirk mentioned and he was the most famous captain.

 

[Tuskin38]

There's a planet named Archer, but not automatically named for ENT's Archer.

It was retconned to be named after him.

Was he mentioned at all in Discovery?

He was mentioned twice.

 

[Damian]

It was retconned to be named after him.


He was mentioned twice.

I forgot there was also a starship Archer in Nemesis, and they indicated that was named for Captain Archer. So there have been some Easter eggs out there since the show came out.

I imagine anything Archer name that was mentioned in previous Star Trek's will probably retconned to be a reference to Captain Archer where possible, though I don't think there are many pre-Enterprise Archer references (the planet mentioned above may be the only one)

 

[Tenacity]

How often in your everyday life do you mention John Paul Jones or Captain James Cook? People don't constantly go around talking about historical figures, unless they're historians. So this doesn't even need to be a question.

Yeah, but look (listen) to how often Kirk is mentioned in TNG-DS9-Voyager.

That just could be that in-universe Kirk had more of a historical impact and is better known (certainly in Starfleet), while Archer is basically a footnote. A decent captain who when on to have a obscure political career.

Archer never saved the galaxy.

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

He is mentioned in books that were written after Enterprise, and of course there was the mention of Archer in Star Trek (2009). Was he mentioned at all in Discovery?

Yes, there was a graphic that appeared on screen listing captains awarded a top commendation and his name was in the top 3.

 

[Damian]

Yeah, but look (listen) to how often Kirk is mentioned in TNG-DS9-Voyager.

But is he really mentioned that often. I remember a handful of times. But I would hardly say it was often.

Certainly Kirk may be mentioned more because he had more impact as a Starfleet officer, and unlike Archer, he never went into the political realm. That probably stunted Archer's Starfleet history making a bit (he may have made famous contributions in the political realm--I guess we'll see what Christopher does with that in future books ).

Yes, there was a graphic that appeared on screen listing captains awarded a top commendation and his name was in the top 3.

He was mentioned twice.

Good to know. I was curious if Discovery paid homage to Enterprise at all, since at that point in history Enterprise was the only show to have occurred in canon.

I'm a holdout waiting for an eventual DVD/Blu-Ray release. I'm hoping maybe they release it just before they start the 2nd season (after they've milked the All Access route for everything they can--I figure just before season 2 would be a good time because they can hope some holdouts would watch it then get excited and decide to buy their online platform). I've actually been pretty good about avoiding spoilers--I mean, I've heard a few things here and there, nothing to ruin it for me though, and I've been reading the Discovery novels.

 

[Jinn]

Yeah, but look (listen) to how often Kirk is mentioned in TNG-DS9-Voyager.

In three TNG episodes, two DS9 episodes (plus "Trials and Tribble-ations, but that doens't really count IMO as he appeared in it) and four times in VGR.

That just could be that in-universe Kirk had more of a historical impact and is better known (certainly in Starfleet), while Archer is basically a footnote. A decent captain who when on to have a obscure political career.

Wasn't he Federation president? Or is that from the books? I distinctly remember it being on the character bio from the mirrior universe two-parter, but I may be wrong.

Archer never saved the galaxy.

Well, he saved Earth from the Xindi, but Kirk did admittedly more for the universe.

 

[Kemaiku]

How often in your everyday life do you mention John Paul Jones or Captain James Cook? People don't constantly go around talking about historical figures, unless they're historians. So this doesn't even need to be a question.

Most people don't obsessively talk about things that happened centuries ago nearly as much as Star Trek does though.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, but look (listen) to how often Kirk is mentioned in TNG-DS9-Voyager.

Here are all the references to Kirk in the 24th-century shows:

TNG:
"The Naked Now" (because they encounter the same disease)
"Unification" (mentioned by Spock)
"Relics" (mentioned by Scott)
Nemesis (Riker uses a "Kirk Epsilon" defense pattern)

DS9:
"Crossover" (explaining Mirror Universe backstory)
"The Sword of Kahless" (by Worf in connection to Kor)
"Trials and Tribble-ations" (for obvious reasons)

VGR:
"Flashback" (ditto)
"Concerning Flight" (Janeway says Kirk claimed he met Leonardo da Vinci)
"Q2" (Icheb's report on Kirk)
"Friendship One" (an admiral likens Voyager's first contact record to Kirk's)

So really, with only a couple of exceptions, Kirk is never mentioned except by characters who knew him personally or who are encountering things he also encountered. So it's not like people are going around constantly name-dropping him in casual conversation. He mostly only came up when he was relevant.

So really, the question isn't why people didn't mention Archer as often as Kirk, it's why they didn't encounter people or things connected to Archer as often as they encountered people or things connected to Kirk. And maybe the greater historical distance could account for that where the 24th-century shows are concerned. But of course the real explanation is just that Archer hadn't been created yet.

 

[Kemaiku]

It's amost like there's nothing actually happening for people to talk about the way normal people do, that day, last week, current politics, music, movies, just a blank lifeless pallet dictated by things from entirely different eras that are all they have to talk about.

 

[Jinn]

Okay, I got a feeling that this thread wasn't created to seriously discuss why Archer wasn't mentioned but rather to post fun reasons for that, so:

When becoming Federation president Archer went a bit off the deep end, started insulting Vulcans on the holonet and got fired quickly. The young Federation decided to purge all records of his presidency, like the 8.5th President from Gravity Falls, hence why he isn't referenced.

 

[Kemaiku]

He travelled to Risa to create the movie that the Vulcan Love Slave novel series would eventually be based on.

No one was amused at his antics.

 

[uniderth]

Because he never existed.

 

[Kemaiku]

Because he never existed.

Kirk's Enterprise is named in his ships honour, so yeah he did.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There's a planet named Archer, but not automatically named for ENT's Archer.

Actually, yes it was. Archer's personnel file (shown onscreen in IAMD II) specifically states that the planet in "Strange New World" was named Archer IV in his honor.

 

[Damian]

Actually, yes it was. Archer's personnel file (shown onscreen in IAMD II) specifically states that the planet in "Strange New World" was named Archer IV in his honor.

I seem to remember seeing somewhere, maybe a novel, that noted the planet was able to be colonized. That they found a cure to the psychotic effects caused by the plants there.

I think what Tenacity means though is Archer IV was first mentioned in TNG, and at that time it obviously didn't refer to Captain Archer since he wasn't created yet.

It was later 'retconned' to be names after Archer. After all, why not? There was nothing to indicate Archer IV was named for something else so why not take it to refer to him?

 

[MacLeod]

People only tend to talk about the past when it is relevant to the conversation/current events.