Patron has decided I need exercise. Not with brush, with thinking. Challenge simple enough: take something completely outside normal scribal work, pull apart, and show how I would find bones of scroll hiding inside. Not simply make something that looks appropriate, more importantly show work. Find visual language, trace where choices might have come from, decide what historical traditions could reasonably produce them, and then build from there. For this exercise Patron smiles, saying “Klingon.”

Very well, Dig in seeing what Klingons stolen from history. What follows is long write up of “how sausage is made” in mind of Nikolai. What does scroll analysis look like and what things are assessed when attempts made to understand new or even familiar styles.

I would break the mature Klingon aesthetic into roughly five historical visual traditions.

Tibetan / Himalayan – Monumental architecture, mountain fortresses, ceremonial interiors, heavy geometric forms
Thai / Lao monumental architecture – Qo’noS skyline, tiered structures, projecting roofs, vertical massing
Feudal Japanese / samurai – Layered armor, broad shoulders, lamellar visual rhythm, warrior-house culture
Steppe / Central Asian – Leather, metal, fur, clan identity, portable heraldry, warrior aristocracy
Germanic / Norse heroic – Hall culture, ancestral weapons, drinking vessels, funerary practice, heroic saga and reputation

And then is sixth component, which not really ethnic, and certainly not medieval: twentieth-century monumental militarist graphic design. This becomes very important when looking at banners, insignia, enormous geometric symbols, limited palette, symmetry of architecture, and deliberate use of scale to make power of state feel intimidating. For several of these things we have direct evidence from production. Dan Curry is quoted by Memory Alpha as saying Klingon architecture developed for Qo’noS was intended as combination of Thai, Lao, and Nepalese architectural styles, drawn in part from his own experience living in Asia.

Likewise, familiar Klingon military costume ultimately derives from Robert Fletcher’s movie-era design, which later costume designer Robert Blackman deliberately preserved and adapted for television. Thus, immediate characterization of Klingon visual culture simply “Vikings in space,” less accurate and much closer to: Himalayan/Inner Asian warrior aristocracy filtered through Japanese martial aesthetics, Germanic heroic culture, and 20th-century monumental state design.

One of most consistent characteristics not particular historical culture at all, that being geometry. Look at Klingon weapons, writing, emblems, architecture, control panels, jewelry, and again and again same vocabulary present: acute angles, interrupted circles, wedges, hooks, bifurcations, heavy diagonals, bilateral symmetry. Even Klingon writing created for production follows same language. Matt Jefferies created some earliest symbols, and Michael Okuda later expanded visual system while deliberately keeping established Klingon graphical appearance, according to Memory Alpha. Klingon trefoil emblem demonstrates almost perfect statement showing this visual grammar: three blades radiating from constrained center. At same time, resembles weapon, heraldic badge, and abstract ideogram. This establishes important rule if we are trying to extrapolate Klingon fine art: Klingons likely prefer controlled geometry over naturalism. Even when depicting natural subjects, such as Kahless, warrior, targ, battle, would expect Klingon artist to reduce subject toward symbolic form, showing what thing is rather than precisely what thing looks like. This begins moving understanding toward historical traditions below, rather than toward Renaissance naturalism.
• steppe metalwork
• Japanese mon
• Tibetan ritual geometry
• heraldry
• woodcut
• monumental relief sculpture
.
That Tibetan and Himalayan influence perhaps strongest architectural ancestor becomes much more apparent once we know Curry’s stated influences. Klingon Great Hall shows these things clearly: massive masonry, dark interiors, authority figures raised above others, enormous banners, much fire, and central spaces made for ritual. Architecture designed so individual feels small beside institution. This also begins crossing into that “sixth influence” mentioned above, though perhaps modern monumental style simply borrowed same ideas from older examples and eventually returned them to Klingons. Klingon version removes much of elaborate vegetal ornament and replaces with severe geometry and exposed structural forms. So imagine Bhutanese dzong, Tibetan monastery, fortress, and brutalism put together. Result comes remarkably close to mature TNG and DS9 Klingon architecture. And this is not only pattern we see afterward and decide fits; Curry himself explicitly identifies Thai, Lao, Nepalese, and Tibetan architectural inspirations.

Klingon society arguably not particularly Japanese, but Japanese culture clearly one influence laid over it, with certain aspects adapted into Klingon visual language. Consider Japanese and Klingon armor. Much same design vocabulary appears: layered protection, segmented surfaces, wide shoulders, cording and strapping, repeated plates, family insignia, ceremonial weapons. Klingon costume then exaggerates these elements. Instead of elegant lamellae, Klingon armor becomes something like industrial lamellar. Klingon artisan does not try hiding construction but celebrates and emphasizes it, making how object is made almost as important to art as shape of object itself. Rivets, joins, plates, seams, reinforcement all become ornament. Again, arguably Arts-and-Crafts principle translated into warrior culture: manufacture of object becomes part of object’s beauty.

We also need incorporate view of Steppe art. Following from Curry’s comments, this historical tradition perhaps explains Klingon art more clearly than simply looking for “Viking” influence. Look at Scythian, Sarmatian, Turkic, and Mongol material culture and find something very Klingon: animals transformed into aggressive geometry. Horns become spirals, jaws become hooks, bodies become interlocking shapes, musculature becomes pattern. Klingon presentation takes these historical ideas and exaggerates further, trying to capture essential force of animal rather than accurate appearance. So if we are trying imitation of Klingon artist, this result should also be goal of finished art. We would not expect Klingon artist’s representation of targ something we would recognize as zoological picture from real world. Instead artist would show those parts of beast making greatest impression upon Klingon mind: tusks, power of shoulders, gaping mouth, ferocity of gaze. Klingon looks upon image not to see exactly what animal looks like, but what animal represents: bestial power.

When looking at influence of Klingon culture upon its art, here common observation that “Klingons are Vikings” actually becomes useful. Not so much in appearance, but in narrative of culture, which then feeds into interpretation of aesthetic. Klingon culture revolves around ancestors, named weapons, lineage, heroic deaths, boasts, reputation, feasting, songs, remembered battles, and stories of heroes who demonstrate what culture believes Klingon ideal should be. Klingon opera even concentrates heavily upon doomed courage and tragic love, again according to Memory Alpha. This resembles heroic Germanic literary culture much more than Japanese culture, thus when thinking about creating Klingon art, I would separate thinking two ways: Japanese and Asian traditions help explain what Klingon objects look like, while Germanic heroic traditions help explain what Klingon art is about. Stay with me. This distinction important, and going somewhere.

As I shift this thinking toward scribal work, let us consider heraldry of Klingon Great Houses. Simply put, they function much in way heraldic houses do, but heraldry itself very much not European. Visually closer to combination of Japanese mon and Steppe tamga, while socially performing function much closer to European heraldry. Tamga becomes especially useful to scribe because is clan or tribal mark found throughout Eurasian Steppe cultures, generally made from very simple geometric forms and, interestingly, some look startlingly Klingon. Now we have more than interesting comparison; we have historical vocabulary we can actually use. If scroll belongs to member of Klingon Great House, is not necessary for invent vaguely alien decoration around House symbol. Scribe can study historical tamga and mon: how marks are constructed, repeated, placed within borders, incorporated into objects, enlarged as dominant devices, or used as identifying marks beside figures. European heraldic manuscripts can then teach scribe where such identity belongs within composition and what narrative work performed, without requiring scribe to make Klingon symbol look like European coat of arms. Steppe tamga gives visual grammar, Japanese mon gives another model for repetition and controlled geometry, and European heraldry gives social function. Klingon House mark remains recognizably Klingon, but decisions surrounding it now come from historical examples rather than invention. This point where deconstruction begins becoming scroll.

Also is deliberate twentieth-century monumental imagery within some Klingon production design. Star Trek VI explicitly leaned into certain modern imagery for portions of Klingon presentation, including treatment of flags, according to Memory Alpha. Here intentional shift of narrative somewhat. Influences used for Star Trek VI and elsewhere arguably simply most temporally convenient examples for creating particular impression. We know these modern forms did not appear from nothing; they themselves borrowed from much older visual traditions, using myth, monument, ceremony, heroic imagery, banners, symbols, and scale intended for desired emotional effect. Designers therefore borrowed aura of most recent and immediately recognizable examples to create visual language of authoritarian monumentality, and this became another layer for artificial culture of Klingon Empire. For scribal purpose, however, we do not need follow this influence back only as far into twentieth century, we can continue digging to those core influences. If goal being creation of artwork which feels recognizably Klingon while remaining grounded in historical artistic practice, scribe can move past these more troublesome and charged modern references and look instead toward older sources from which much of same visual vocabulary was itself drawn. Monument, banner, heroic figure, geometric symbol, ritual space, martial identity, and deliberate use of scale all have much deeper histories. This lets scribe preserve impression that production designers were seeking without reproducing baggage of their most modern references. In short, analysis intentionally not trying to copy Klingon production design, rather trying to find historical bones underneath because those bones are what can become scroll.

Now comes payoff of assignment: having taken Klingon visual culture apart; what can scribe do to put back together as something historical scribe might actually make? At this point, extrapolation becomes necessary, as this being artistic leap scribe must make. If we pretend Klingon artistic history truly existed, scribe would reconstruct mature visual tradition from Tibetan manuscript composition, Scythian animal abstraction, Japanese mon, Central Asian tamga, Germanic heroic narrative, Japanese and Steppe traditions of armor craftsmanship, and monumental graphic design. Throw all of these into blender, puree on very high speed, and what pours out should not simply be collage where we can still point to each borrowed piece. It should be new visual language in which these elements have become core design principles. More importantly for scribe, each ingredient gives us historical source material to consult when making particular decision. We are no longer asking how to make scroll “look Klingon.” We are asking how hypothetical Klingon scribe might solve problems of composition, symbolism, narrative, ornament, heraldry, and representation, and now we have historical models from which answers can be built.

Klingon-inspired illuminated manuscript being end result of question, thus imagine dark red-brown or black prepared surface, surrounded by heavy geometric border. Border contains elements recognizable as something like geometric knotwork, but exaggerated and made heavier to show strength and power rather than elegance. Palette would use yellow, iron-red, muted gold, perhaps dark bronze, but overall effect should be one of strong contrast, where sharp difference exists between foreground and background making entire composition feel harsher. Colors should complement when they belong together but deliberately clash when representation demands it. Colors within House badge, for example, should work together, but badge itself might overpower and fight against background, because purpose is to show dominance and power of House rather than create comfortable harmony. Figures would be treated more like representations of eleventh or twelfth centuries than naturalistic figures of fifteenth or sixteenth, because likeness is less important than meaning. There would be no delicate acanthus leaves curling through border; instead we would have harsh curves of weapons, tusks, interlocking blades, fire motifs, and angular knotwork all becoming ornament together. Illuminated scenes would similarly avoid Renaissance perspective. Status controls scale: King and Queen might be enormous, recipient smaller but still important within same hierarchy, while dead warriors in foreground or distance could become repeated geometric bodies, less individual people than pattern showing cost and scale of battle.

Again, this brings conversation into core difference of representation, and for me this is perhaps most exciting part of digging into aesthetic. Much of Western human art eventually becomes very concerned with question, What did this look like? I not think mature Klingon art would care nearly so much. Klingon question would be, What did this mean? Because of this, Klingon art probably more commemorative than presentational. Modern battle painting often tries to capture one moment in time, sensation of instant, like Washington crossing Delaware. Klingon painting would remember different things. It would tell who stood, who fled, who killed whom, whose House gained honor, whose House carried shame, and most importantly what lesson descendants are expected to remember. This means closest human analogues are not necessarily later naturalistic paintings at all, but things such as Bayeux Tapestry, heroic manuscript illumination, victory stelae, heraldry, saga illustration, Tibetan religious narrative art, and Steppe memorial objects. Painting of Washington crossing Delaware possibly would have Washington already ashore and assaulting British, he would be 3 times size of men, ice and snow bouncing off chest as his presence brushes aside attacks, laying waste around him with Sabre. Suddenly we have surprisingly coherent artistic tradition. And yes, from here scribe can go much farther, constructing historically plausible Klingon manuscript and illumination style with its own palette, borders, figure conventions, House heraldry, representations of Kahless, battle scenes, calligraphy, pigments and materials, perhaps even different chronological artistic “schools.” We could make system complete enough that scribe approaches Klingon work same way as would approach fifteenth-century manuscript assignment: first determine period, school, visual grammar, materials, and purpose, and only then begin designing work according to those rules.

Here having come to end of assignment. This write up less about full minutiae on details as much much more research can be done; but more to focus on how an analysis ‘can’ be done on new and different styles. Art represents cultures from which creation happens and understanding of source material to point where creative interpretation possible allows scribe to leverage creativity. Modern aesthetics important as recipients of scrolls do not have medieval minds. Making artifact that both inspires joy in recipient and mirrors period execution always delicate balancing act, and to enable scribe’s creative freedom to make “new thing with old references,” this knowledge acts like Rosetta stone.