Addendum to Canon vs. Fanon, part 14: How old is Sam, really?

[fignewton]

There was considerable discussion in the comments section of the Sam Carter edition regarding Sam's actual age. If you're interested in reading the details that lead to the final conclusion (the screencap from Entity doesn't work, but Sam is still younger than Daniel), this link will take you directly to the new analysis.

And thanks, Codger. :)

Comments

[abyssinia4077.livejournal.com]

Really? I got the impression from those that she *had* been trained as an Air Force jet pilot (when being the question).

I just assume since we never (unless I'm forgetting something) see her actually fly an F-302 (she sits second seat with Jack - more the navigator/instrument role while Jack flies) and since she does not have pilot's bars on her dress uniform, she isn't trained to that level. I firmly believe she has some form of flight crew training and knows how to fly (private pilot's license or somesuch) and I think there's a good chance she had some pilot training - but likely only basics (not specializing to fighter jets or something).

It's true, most military personnel who become astronauts are pilots - but that makes sense if you look at the possible tracks. I'm pretty sure it's not all, but I could be wrong (and being pilots could meant very different things - you can be a pilot with jet fighter school, etc). I agree Sam would try to get pilot training but that doesn't mean she did necessarily.

See, though, Codger has shown that the timeline can work - perhaps would take luck and skill to make it happen, but everyone on SG-1 is stretched just to the other side of believability - it's part of what makes them all awesome. Only the best for the flagship team of the SGC and all.

[tejas.livejournal.com]

One of the issues I have with his timeline is that it A. astrophysics of the 60s is far different from astrophysics in the 80s and B. sad to say, it's going to be far more difficult for a woman to get through the program, NOT because she's less capable or intelligent, but because physics is one of the last bastions of the Good Ol' Boy network in academia. Nowhere is sexism more rampant than in physics. (I work in higher ed and have known many *MANY* physics grad students of various stripes - women get all sorts of lovely roadblocks thrown at them that have nothing to do with their ability and everything to do with their gender.) It's gonna have taken her closer to five years just to get through the crap she'd have to deal with.

As to the missing bars on her uniform. Props again. Don't trust 'em, they lie. Just look at Jack's stars when he was dealing with Prior!Daniel.

[abyssinia4077.livejournal.com]

Oh, believe me I know. The, um, atmosphere, among physicists is one of the reasons I traded my planned physics degree for a chemistry degree instead and, yes, physics can still be really bad in a lot of places (though computer science is really bad too in that respect - possibly worse), particularly with gender issues.

It's possible she lucked out with the right school and the right advisor and enough tenacity and brilliance to pull it off - but I do have trouble believing anything less than 4 years in grad school (and 4 is stretching).

See, props can be funky, yes (Jack's stars) but...if you look for patterns, it works. Sam's uniform never (I believe) has pilot's wings. I'm comfortable considering a consistent prop to be canon evidence.

[tejas.livejournal.com]

I'm not comfortable considering any kind of prop detail like that canon.

And yeah, I could see her managing in four years. I have zero trouble with her brilliance, just trouble seeing that even a woman as brilliant as she is could go through too rapidly. Just the fact that she DID it, is pretty amazing. Most women end up getting run out of the field. The stats are very depressing.

[aurora-novarum.livejournal.com]

I know you and I are never going to agree on this, but I've finally got to speak up on the props as canon argument. LOL! Because details in the uniform they do show are checked with the military advisors they have (do they always listen, no...see Atlantis, but with SG-1 they do try to make it work).

Writers may not have a say in the props, but the writers of Stargate are also the producers, and they DO have say in the final product of the show. Some to a higher degree than others, I'll definitely grant you, but I don't dismiss a prop out of hand because it's all part and parcel of the final product.

The Shroud uniform stars was a blooper for sure, but there's been bloopers in dialogue too (see how many years Jacob's had a symbiote or calling Jack's homemade ZPM "Asgard technology"). I don't necessarily dismiss any/all props as canon just because it's not "stated out loud" in the show.

As for Sam having issues as a woman and getting her doctorate in the early 90s as opposed to the 1960s? I do agree it stretches credulity. But

[tejas.livejournal.com]

They ditched their military advisors quite a few seasons ago.

[sg-fignewton.livejournal.com]

I do think you're being a bit sweeping, here. :) Not everything that is a prop warrants automatic dismissal.

Yes, props do get messed up on occasion. And yes, the writers tend to leave vague phrases like "backdrop of schematics for honking big ship" in the scripts. But some things have been readily uniform (pardon the pun) year after year; and just as I accept the prop of Daniel's glasses, I accept other things, too.

YMMV, and apparently does. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. :)

[tejas.livejournal.com]

And I can live with that. ;-) I do see the reasoning behind your stance and I can respect it. I just happen to put more importance on other aspects. I think we're probably only disagreeing on the matter of about four years or so. Ultimately, TPTB have left it oddly ambiguous given the solid ages given for the three guys. It drives me NUTS! :-);-)