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]

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.

Vala's behavior toward Baal's host in Continuum is interesting. She wants to help him and the way she acts it's like she expects that he'll get better and be able to live his own life like she did. But unless Baal's host is much younger than we've been led to believe (and I don't think he is since he was one of the ones that the Tok'ra were willing to sacrifice in Summit...not that the Tok'ra haven't applied creative ethics to situations before) there's a good chance he'll either die or be such a shell of himself that...what's the point?

I really wish they hadn't used that part just for comic relief in the movie. It really could have given us a nice insight into the effect of the Goa'uld on the host.

[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.

[scrollgirl]

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 didn't think it was quite so airy *g* but yeah, I get what you're saying. I liked that Vala had so much compassion for Ba'al's host. And the chance of him being a clone was actually pretty good (how many clones to one real deal?) so if he *was* a clone (and he was) then he probably wouldn't suffer the rapid aging that the original host would have experienced.

[sg_fignewton]

Okay, yes, not so airy. :) But pretty dismissive nonetheless, for a guy who gave last rites to the host of Apophis. I was definitely on Vala's side in that exchange!

One wonders how viable the clones were without the symbiotes, though...

[samantilles]

I think there might be two main issues (neither are necessarily mutually exclusive, nor are they inclusive to each other):
1. The host would still retain all the knowledge of the blended goa'uld--the de-goa'ulded host may not be able to handle everything they have seen/genetically remembered.
2. Whether they like it or not, they've had a whole other life-form in their head for a very long time--the separation from their captors probably would drive them insane-a twisted case of Stockholm syndrome?
3. The effect of the sarcophagus on the soul of the host.

Until reading this, I hadn't considered the third an option, but I am curious which of the three the Tok'ra might use as their basis for dismissing the deaths of the host. But I'm also quite curious why they would go through an extraction ceremony for Ba'al and all of his clones if they did not believe deep down that there is hope for the host?

[tejas]

2. Whether they like it or not, they've had a whole other life-form in their head for a very long time--the separation from their captors probably would drive them insane-a twisted case of Stockholm syndrome?

*blink*

*blink*

BLAST YOU, SAM! The bunnies. Oh, the bunnies!

[samantilles]

does this mean you'll write me awesome tejas fic?? *bats eyes hopefully*

[tejas]

GGGRRR!

I'll blame you for the Stockholm bunny, that's for sure. :-);-)

But it's a damn good bunny. It's in the hutch, but I have no idea when or if it'll rip the door off and charge me with wild eyes and intent to write. :-)

[sg_fignewton]

See, now your #1 is my own explanation for "nothing of the host survives." Pretty bleak, but the only host we see whole is Skaara, and we know he spent his entire time fighting back.

Your #2 is scary, all round.

Good question about the formal extraction ceremony. It may be for all Goa'uld, though, not just System Lords, and I suppose they felt the poor host deserved that they at least go through the motions.

[samantilles]

2. If any host survives 100 years (let alone 2000 as Ba'al's is supposed to have been inhabited) with another voice in their head, I would put money down that the host would become schizophrenic--even worse because not only does it have the memory of being inhabited, it still retains all the goa'uld's memories, including those memories about the goa'uld suppressing the will of the hosts. I'd wager any host who's been taken for a long time is a serious threat to themselves and the universe-especially if the sarcophagus rips away at their conscience and all they have left are the imprints of pure evil from the goa'uld. The big question then becomes how long is that threshold? (not that I'd ever expect an answer) But I do think the answer is directly related to the amount of usage of the sarcophagus and the determination of the host to fight back. The three former hosts we see all have several factors in common: the goa'uld did not greatly expand their natural lifetimes (the longest of these was probably Vala/Qatesh) and probably did not require much use of the sarcophagus (and here Klorel is the exception-he used it quite a bit but what seemed for legitimate injuries or supressing Skaara, who was a formidable challenger to Klorel inside their heads.)

As grim as it may seem, as the Tok'ra seemed to think the host insignificant after all they've been through, I must wonder a few things:
1. Was the removal of the symbiote perhaps more of a humiliation to the goa'uld as part of its punishment to writhe and die in front of them?
2. Would the Tok'ra attempt to use a previously goa'ulded host to gain intelligence? Would they go so far as to re-implant for that purpose?
3. Do their humanitarian efforts go so far as to try to integrate de-goa'ulded hosts into their society or help them create one of their own? Or do they just dump the host at the nearest stargate and dial it up for them?

[sg_fignewton]

I'm not disagreeing with you at all here, but let's not forget that the idea of a host suffering endless nightmares about everything the symbiote did when it was in past hosts is actually fanon. We know that Sha're and Skaara and Vala remembered things, but it is always in reference to things they actually physically experienced - Sha're knowing that Apophis calls Teal'c "sholva," and that Amaunet sent Shifu to Kheb; Skaara remembering how Klorel tried to kill Daniel; Vala remembering the people Qetesh enslaved, although IIRC, Vala kept up the facade after Qetesh was removed as well.

I agree that length of sarc use as well as length of possession is a factor, but while I will never suggest diminishing Skaara's courage and determination, we don't actually know that Amaunet and/or Qetesh didn't do something similar to keep their hosts in thrall. Amaunet, of course, went months without the sarc on Abydos, which may explain why Sha're was still able to exert enough control to keep her quiet about Daniel when they left.

1. Interesting question. I was personally disappointed in the symbiote in Continuum - very small and puny, considering.

2. Well, they used Jack as a host to get intelligence from Kanan, didn't they?

Fanon widely accepts that the Tok'ra tortured Qetesh-in-Vala to get information from her before they removed the symbiote, but there's no canon proof for that.

3. I am almost positive that Vala specifically says she was dumped back in her original society and then shunned and scorned until she left - that is, sent home, but then abandoned. OTOH, if I'm right about this, it was certainly Vala speaking during her shameless-liar phase, so we'd have to take it with a pound or so of salt. :)

[samantilles]

Fanon widely accepts that the Tok'ra tortured Qetesh-in-Vala to get information from her before they removed the symbiote, but there's no canon proof for that.

I've never read such a story, though now I'm a bit fascinated to find one. I am still just scratching the surface of Stargate's fanfiction. Any suggestions on stories with this?

I would also love to see a Canon vs. Fanon article on the Tok'ra, by the way. Your essays always make me think and usually put new ideas in my head!!!

[sg_fignewton]

Oh, there's definitely a single story - very powerful - that started the fanon. Salieri wrote it. Yes, here: Speaking of Vala, by troyswann.

Mind you, it makes so much sense that I'm not surprised fandom picked up on this and ran with it. ::salutes Salieri::

Thanks for the lovely compliment! I don't know if I'll ever write a wholly Tok'ra-centric c vs. f, but they'll definitely be referenced from time to time - just like they are here. :)