Review: Hippocratic Oath (DS9)
Balaji
The show's main theme appears to be to contrast two ways of viewing the
world: the one unyielding of its convictions, finding strength in
certainty, the other taking scepticism as a keystone, willing to
concede that one's own viewpoint may conceal biases: liberalism and
fundamentalism, if you like. An important theme of this century's
literature: Rushdie's Satanic Verses and John Le Carre's Smiley stories
are centred on this debate. The theme is narrated in three parallel
stories: Worf learning that the simple morality which served him well
aboard the Enterprise is out of place in the ethical murk of DS9; a band
of Jem'Hadar trying to come to terms with a leader who has begun to
question the rigid code laid down for them by the Founders; and the
debate between their captives: O'Brien, who cannot see the Jem'Hadar ever
acting beyond their natures, and Bashir, who grants them a full measure
of humanity.
The renegade Jem'Hadar -- I don't recall him his name, so let's call him
Jem'Hugh -- most clearly states the parallel to religious fundamentalism
and sets out the liberal response; one of his subordinates replies that
if weakness and self-doubt are the price of freedom he prefers
enslavement. This, quite succinctly, _is_ the key debate. It's not an
easy one.
Worf, on the other hand, cannot understand why Odo allows Quark to
continue to operate. After disastrously meddling in Odo's affairs, he
ruefully confesses to Sisko to being out of his depth on DS9. On the
Enterprise, he says, I knew who my allies were, and who my enemies.
There's no Starfleet manual for DS9, replies Sisko. You have to make it
up as you go along. This, I strongly believe, is Berman trying to pull
away from the alleged Roddenberry "vision". For Starfleet manual, read
Roddenberry's vision. For Enterprise, read TNG. For DS9, read, well,
DS9. The simple-minded preachiness that so often undermined TNG doesn't
belong on DS9, Berman is saying.
Yet, despite this claim, DS9 is really not that much different. The
O'Brien-Bashir plot showed this most clearly. Their fundamental
difference of opinion over how to deal with Jem'Hugh at one point
escalated to a full-scale row that might have permanently scarred their
friendship. At this point, we didn't know if O'Brien was right to be
suspicious of Jem'Hugh or not, nor how he was going to react to Bashir
pulling rank on him; at this point the show hit a welcome peak of
ambiguity. This is first undercut with an unnecessary scene where
Jem'Hugh was unequivocally shown to be a "nice guy", in O'Brien's words:
hence, O'Brien was wrong, Bashir was right. This is back on track with
the rectitude of TNG. And it is further undermined at the end in an
appalling reset-button exchange between the two which can best be summed
up as: "You overruled my judgment, O'Brien!" "I did it because I loved
you!" "Oh well, in that case, fine, I love you too." Sad way to end, but
so typically, so predictably Trek.
It is not easy to operate without a moral compass, yet the most easily
attainable ones lead down the road that lead to Hamas and Operation
Rescue. Why should one forsake the strength of ordained, unassailable
knowledge? For what? This is a fundamental dilemma of our times, and
while all three stories try to come terms with it, the answer they
provide remains absurdly shallow.
Minor notes:
- The feminization of Kira continues apace, I'm sad to see.
- Brooks was, as in WotW, brilliant in the Sisko-Worf scenes.
Shimerman hit the exact Quark notes: his: "Well, now if you've
_quite_ finished with this little fiasco..." was superb.
- Terry Farrell got the week off.
- Why does Colm Meaney's name not appear in the lead credits? He gets
more on-screen time, and more O'Brien-centred shows, than many of the
other regulars.
--
Balaji
The pedestrian remains the largest single obstacle to the free flow of
traffic. -- from a Los Angeles planning report
--
Moderated by Scott Forbes. Submissions to trek-r...@mcs.com, all else
to trek-revie...@mcs.com. Sponsored by MCSNet of Chicagoland --
<http://www.mcs.net/> or e-mail to in...@mcs.com for more information.