Canon vs. Fanon, part 19: Sarcophagus Use

[sg_fignewton]

Welcome to the latest edition of Canon vs. Fanon! Pull up your keyboard and join the fun. I've had lots of people wandering onto my flist of late, and you're all very welcome. :) If you're new to the Canon vs. Fanon series, you can read older entries via the tags or the LJ Index.

Comments

[6beforelunch]

I am very much intrigued by Apophis and his not-quite-healed face in The Devil You Know and Enemies. As I noted above, it seems to be the only canon incident in which the sarcophagus does not heal someone completely. Any theories for this one?

I've seen a lot of stories suggest that the sarcophagus cannot regrow limbs or heal an old injury. So it's possible that if Sokar took took a big enough chunk out of Apophis face or, more likely, left him to suffer for a long time before he finally died so that the wound had already started to heal on its own and scar, the sarcophagus couldn't heal the damage.

Pure conjecture, but it makes sense to me.

And I got nothin' for Daniel's shirt in Serpent's Lair. Especially since in Abyss Jack's outfit gets progressively more holey as time goes on.

[sg_fignewton]

Hmmm. I like the theory about older scars remaining. Anyone take a close enough look at descended Daniel to see if he still had his appendix scar? ;)

And yes - you'd think that if a Special Edition Sarcophagus that fixes clothing actually existed, Ba'al would definitely have gone for the upgrade!

[6beforelunch]

Heh. I'm sure there are some fans out there who paused Fallen and Threads to try check. You can't see a whole lot in either episode, though

[sg_fignewton]

I think I love your brain for this:

do you think Daniel has a do-not-sarcophagus-under-any-circumstances clause in his living will? Do you think his teammates would honor it even if he did?

I'd say yes, he does, and no, they wouldn't. I can see Jack saying, "I'd rather have an addicted Daniel who tries to kill me than a dead one."

Stargate is at its best when it gives us genuine moral dilemmas, like the ones you suggest here. Of course, it doesn't happen too often, does it? ;)

[sg_wonderland]

"I am very much intrigued by Apophis and his not-quite-healed face in The Devil You Know and Enemies. As I noted above, it seems to be the only canon incident in which the sarcophagus does not heal someone completely. Any theories for this one

[sg_fignewton]

Hmm. Can't be solely due to an effort to conceal himself, since he still has it in enemies.

Thanks for the nitpick link! I don't actually agree with all of them :) but it was interesting reading.

[sg_wonderland]

After I saw some of the other comments, I have to say that I like Tejas' better. That Sokar left that as a little remember-who's-in-charge kind of thing...

[annerbhp]

It's probably a crossover into my personal fanon, but I can't dismiss the events of Abyss. I find that episode rather fundamental for understanding how the sarcophagus possibly affects unblended humans. The writers seemed to make a big deal about the fact that it wasn't just the torture that was getting to Jack in Abyss, but that his soul was being affected by prolonged use of the sarcophagus. Because if we use Daniel's lack of evil after his *first* pass through the sarcophagus in Need (or the movie, or Serpent's Grasp) as evidence that using the sarcophagus when you are injured doesn't affect you, it could just as easily be said that *one* use of the sarcophagus, injured or not, is not enough to affect you, and is independent of the person being injured or not. Could a healthy person use the sarcophagus once and not be negatively affected or becoming addicted? We don't know, because that situation has never been shown in canon. So the injured one time uses by Daniel only prove that once isn't enough to develop addiction or soul-loss

[sg_fignewton]

Oh, some nice speculation, here.

But it makes me wonder - how frequently do the uses need to be in order to have a cumulative effect? Hours? Days? Weeks, months, years? Because Daniel did use the sarc repeatedly, even if there were long periods in between, before he started going soulless.

Still - I like your theory very much. It's not so much what you're using it for, as much as how often.

OTOH, if that was the case, why couldn't the Tok'ra use it every once in a while, instead of eschewing it so completely? Or maybe that's a fear of once it's available, they'll start down a slippery slope: once a year, then once every few months, then once every few weeks...

Like with most things, just enough wiggle room for us to have fun with fanon. ;)

Yeah. There's a reason I said I'm not going to draw any real conclusions with this one. :)

[tejas]

I thought the snakes would become addicted immediately.

Or else, that's fanon I picked up somewhere. :-)

[sg_fignewton]

Pretty sure that's fanon. :) Can you find a citation?

[samantilles]

It strikes me curious about what you mentioned about the hosts of the symbiote. We actually see quite a few people de-goa'ulded throughout the series (Skaara, Sarah Gardner, Vala Mal Doran) who prove that something of the host does exist, which is why we always held so much hope for Sha're. But all three of the hosts in question were "hosts for a relatively short time" to quote Daniel from Continuum. How then would the hosts of the System Lords, who have been hosts for thousands of years, really come out from being de-goa'ulded? Something of the host does survive, as we see in Serpent's Song, but other than a final call for death or to bring the soul to rest, could a host survive and re-enter society? What kind of life would/could they possibly have as their conciousnesses have been suppressed and broken apart by repeated use of the sarcophagus for centuries? At what point in the life of being a host does the quality of life for the host deteriorate past the point it is capable of living in the world?

[6beforelunch]

It's also worth noting that in Summit/Last Stand, the Tok'ra dismiss the death of the hosts because they've been hosts for hundreds and thousands of years and there's no hope for them anyway. (And Daniel goes along with them, so he must believe that.) I always assumed that that was because they'd rapidly age and then die like Apophis' host in Serpent's Song, but I wonder if it's also because there's so little of them left that it's not worth it

[sg_fignewton]

Oh, Daniel's airy dismissal in Continuum of Ba'al's host was one of the worst bits, as far as I was concerned. Although maybe she thought/hoped he might be one of the clones, and thus not quite as damaged?

I wonder if it's also because there's so little of them left that it's not worth it.

Yes, well, typical of the Tok'ra to make that judgment call on their behalf... but yes, I don't think they'd survive long, even without something poisoning their systems.

[6beforelunch]

Yeah, it was really annoying. Daniel's attitude most of all. I still think the host died not long after. It's the only thing that makes sense with the way I read canon.

[tejas]

Excellent essay, as usual. ;-)

The way I rationalize Abyss is, if we accept that Jack was, in fact, addicted, then there's no reason why Ba'al couldn't have put him back in for a few more cycles every time he died for the sole purpose of addicting him. On the other hand, he didn't behave as if he'd been addicted. But then, the additional mental trauma could have impacted that, as well. Oh! On the third hand, maybe if you're killed and revived too often in a relatively short period, there's still a level of addiction. Daniel never suffered from addiction from his various deaths (outside of Need) because they were far enough apart to avoid that drawback

[sg_fignewton]

Thank you! :)

Regarding your Ba'al theory - that implies that Ba'al himself recognizes what sarc addiction is, and really, why should he? I can't see the Goa'uld conducting experiments on their slaves - they wouldn't want to get their sarcophagi tainted by unnecessary contact with mere humans.

Your Klorel theory is intriguing, although his sheer fury when he gets up suggests he wouldn't have wanted to hang around more than necessary.

Yeah, I can easily see Sokar doing something like that. One wonders what other damage was hidden under Apophis' clothing.

[tejas]

Ba'al and Yu always struck me as the most intellectually curious of the bunch. I can *easily* see Ba'al researching the effects of the sarc on humans and attempting to understand how that would translate to its effect on his host. I'd be willing to bet that Ba'al knows more about the human body and human/Goa'uld interaction than any other Goa'uld. He's the kind I could see attempting to breed a better class of host - body stronger, more resilient, more beautiful and yet with little individuality to make his habitation more pleasant.

As to what else might have been hiding under Apophis' clothing... perhaps it's what *isn't* hiding there any longer. :-)

[sg_fignewton]

::thwaps Tejas::

We keep it PG rated here, thank you!

Interesting theories re Ba'al and Yu and their interest in research. I'd put that kind of ideas more in Nirrti's purview, though. All interesting in creating hoktaur - sarcophagus hot washes would be right up her alley.