Lynch's Spoiler Review: "The Masterpiece Society"
Timothy W. Lynch
this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
want the gory details.
Better life through genetically-engineered yuppie scum. :-)
Well...some of each here. It was better than I was expecting, but another
"The Measure of a Man" it definitely wasn't. Still, some interesting issues.
More later, after this message from your local synopsis:
The Enterprise is investigating the effect of a runaway "stellar core
fragment" on nearby planetary systems when it finds out one of them is,
unfortunately, inhabited. The leader, Aaron Conor, only consents to talk to
them after Picard makes it clear just how much danger they're in. He allows
them to come down to their sealed biosphere (initially intrigued by their
transporter) to talk over alternatives to evacuation.
The problem soon becomes apparent. The colony here on Moab Four is a
genetically engineered one, apparently superior to normal humanity. It is
completely in tune with its surroundings, and to uproot it would be
disastrous for the social fabric of the colony. [Conor was bred to be the
leader of the colony, and has never been anything but contented in his
role--*everyone* is perfectly content there.] Geordi gets to work with
Hannah Bates, a brilliant theoretical physicist, while Troi stays to visit
the colony, fascinated by this culture. Geordi and Hannah hit upon a
possibility (a multi-phase, much strengthened tractor beam), but need to
adjourn to the Enterprise to work further. With much concern over Hannah's
temporary departure, Aaron allows her to leave.
Three days later [with about three remaining until the core passes by], no
real progress has been made. Troi, on Picard's orders, works on making sure
Aaron can understand the consequences of whatever decision he chooses to
make. Meanwhile, as Hannah and Geordi take a break and discuss Geordi's
VISOR, Geordi gets the revelation that the data-compression feature of the
VISOR could solve the technical problems they're experiencing--and notes the
irony that the solution to the problem came from something built for a man
who wouldn't even exist in Hannah's culture. Meanwhile, Troi finds herself
warming to Aaron's charms, and against her better judgement is seduced by
him.
The tractor beam will work to a fault, it turns out, but the Biosphere shield
will also need to be strengthened, which will require approximately fifty
people from Engineering down on the surface. Aaron, recently taken aback by
Troi's sudden iciness [she realizes she's made a *vast* mistake in
contaminating their culture], rather numbly agrees to the plan, seeing no
other choices. With everything ready, the solution is implemented--and with
no leeway left over, manages to work. Everyone is relieved--but Hannah seems
pensive about returning to the colony.
Hannah fakes a breach in the Biosphere in an attempt to force the colonists
to evacuate anyway. When that fails, she simply decides to tell Geordi
outright that her culture is, in her opinion, sitting in the Dark Ages, with
no progress, no drive, and no innovation. She requests asylum on the
Enterprise--and she's not alone. Picard is taken aback by this [the gaps
caused by these colonists' departure could destroy the fabric of the colony],
and confers with Aaron. He tells Aaron that he will speak to them and urge
them not to make rash decisions, but also says that if they finally decide to
leave, he can't turn them away. Aaron asks Hannah for six months to show her
how they can adjust, but Hannah and the others will hear none of it; the
damage is already done, and the perfect society is already dead. They leave
with the Enterprise--and Picard wonders whether the literal saving of the
colony was worth the damage the Enterprise inadvertently caused.
There. Nice and neat. Now, commentary.
I'm usually pretty sure what I think about a show right after it airs; the
second watch [gotta get that synop right :-) ] is generally little more than
reinforcement of what I already feel. This was an exception; I was very
murky going into most of the second viewing, and I didn't make any real
decisions until I was close to done with it.
It was better than I expected, definitely. A lot of that's probably because
it wasn't nearly the way the preview presented it. The preview gave Troi's
romance far higher importance than it had in the show--and given that I think
it was the worst part of the show hands down, that led to improvement. It
also made the attempt to move the core a bigger deal than it was, although I
don't know what effect that had in the end.
There were really three plots here, I think: the attempt to save the colony
from the stellar core fragment, the social upheaval caused by all the
surrounding events, and Troi's romance with Aaron. Let's take them in order:
The "save-the-planet" plot was a little shopworn, but definitely done with
more flair (and more sense!) than usual. For once, it doesn't come down to
"if we don't do it this second, the ship gets destroyed." The ship was never
really in danger--even if life support goes down you've got a little bit of
time [assuming LS involves air circulation and so forth, there's time to use
up some stale air, certainly]. This wasn't routine by any means, but it
wasn't the "tacked-on menace" common to things like "In Theory" and "Hero
Worship". I also thought Geordi's sudden revelation made a lot of sense, in
addition to working *very* well on the "social upheaval" level. Extra points
for a really knife-twisting irony there.
The social upheaval plot was, in some ways, TNG's take on "A Private Little
War". Not the competition angle of it, but the "damned if you do, damned if
you don't" prospects. Don't help 'em, and they die. Help 'em, and they may
kill themselves in gratitude. What a wonderful choice--and what a nasty,
nasty dilemma to get thrown in. (This sort of effect on the culture, BTW, is
exactly what TOS always used to gloss over; "The Return of the Archons" comes
to mind as the most vivid example of the "oh, well, we just took apart the
entire fabric of your society, and you'll suffer a lot, but at least you'll
be human now, la de dah" attitude that frequently turned me off.) Nice work
there.
The "Troi has a romance and then agonizes over it plot": well, the less said
the better. There's no need to bring in a possible *literal* contamination
of the gene pool when the social side of it is working so damned well, and
most of the scenes were extraordinarily drawn-out. This was a near-total
loss.
Still, two out of three [or more, given that the Troi plot was the least
important of the three] is reasonable enough, right?
As for how it was handled...well, it's kinda mixed. Nothing glaringly good
OR bad comes to mind, but I think that in general it was just a bit too
talky. When the talk is snappy dialogue, or *important* dialogue [e.g. the
Geordi/Hannah talk about the VISOR], it worked--but there were a lot of
interminably long speeches. (Several of Aaron's come to mind, as does Troi's
speech to Picard in the turbolift towards the end.) And while a little piano
music can nicely set a mood if done right, who picked the pieces? I mean,
talk about filler--this was almost piano Muzak, and it didn't help. The two
sounder plots were put together a little more tightly than the Troi plot, but
all three were a little on the slow side.
The regulars' characterization was, with one exception, quite strong. Picard
in particular was interesting--I can definitely see him reacting rather
strongly to this genetically perfect, ideal, *sterile* society. [Being told
"you were meant to do this and bred to do this" obviously isn't something he
takes well to, given his family history.] In addition, the no-win scenario
he was faced with strikes me as just the sort of thing to really concern him;
given all his attempts to set the damage right in "Who Watches the Watchers",
for instance, I can readily see that having his ship be personally (so to
speak) responsible for the radical upheaval and possible destruction of an
innocent society could really give him the willies. Nice there. Geordi was
better than I've seen him in a while, and was given a lot of sound reasons
for his attitude--after all, if the culture you're helping wouldn't have
allowed you to be born in the first place, you'd probably be a little
sharp-tongued about it too.
The exception, alas, was Troi. Well, she's had three episodes in a row with
good treatment; I suppose the streak had to end sometime. This Troi was
hardly the pillar of strength needed in diplomatic missions, or even in a
counseling session; while I can see her going overboard to some extent with
her wish to help, I can't see her getting sucked into this romance, and I
*really* can't see her lamenting it in that particular way. She shone for a
minute in her angry goodbye to Aaron, but that's really about it. Sigh.
The guest star characterization, on the whole, was pretty good. I'm sure
those who thought "First Contact" had one-dimensional guests will probably
see this the same way, as the outlines are similar [a stick-to-tradition
grouser, an enlightened and visionary scientist, and a fairly wise and
confident leader]. I happened to think FC was very *well* characterized, so
it's no surprise I felt the same rough way here. Comparing them, I'd
possibly put Hannah even above FC's Mirasta--I found her refreshing, and much
more able to change. [It probably helped that Dey Young's extremely cute,
too. ;-) ] Aaron would definitely go below Chancellor Durken, though (I'm a
big George Coe fan, and Aaron always seemed a little less upright and more
slimy to me than he was presented. And Martin, while definitely interesting,
didn't have the time to develop that Krola did, so there's no easy way to
compare.
Let's see...on to short takes.
Scientific Sense: some of each here. The "stellar core fragment" is a
horrible, HORRIBLE name for what's actually not a bad concept--a bit of
neutron star flying around. (And they got the density of neutron star
material RIGHT! Miracles *DO* happen! :-) ) And the VISOR's range (1 Hz to
100,000 THz, according to Geordi) at least has a decent upper limit; a 3 nm
wavelength boundary puts it right around high-energy UV or low X-rays, which
makes sense. The lower bound's absurd, though--1 Hz EM radiation works out
to a 300,000 *kilometer* wavelength, and that's not only silly to try to look
at, it's dead impossible given the size of the VISOR. And my wife hemmed and
hawed a bit about the "8 generations" of genetic engineering producing
something so allegedly perfect; I personally think there's enough of a
precedent set with Khan and the Mariposans [supermen and cloning,
respectively] that they can get away with it.
Oh, one other thing, though--Hannah's a *theoretical* physicist?
Riiiiiiight. That's why she's drawing up schematics of possible instruments.
Guys, doing theory does *not* usually mean you do everything shy of actually
building the thing; most theorists I know wouldn't even come close. Leave
her as a physicist and team her up with Geordi the ultracompetent engineer;
that's fine.
Music: Chattaway's slipping a bit. Elements of this were nice (I liked the
swell when Geordi realized the VISOR was the key, and some of the darker
music towards the very end), but very little of it really stood out. Plus,
the piano music during the Troi/Aaron scenes was dreadful.
FX: Not bad, though the effects in the preview for "Conundrum" caught my eye
a lot faster.
Familiarity File: John Snyder, the fellow who played Aaron, might look or
sound familiar. He should; he played Centurion Bochra, Geordi's opposite
number, in "The Enemy". Interestingly, Bochra commented on Geordi's
blindness with "And your parents let you live?"; a rather pertinent comment
for the theme of Aaron's society. Cute.
And one of the two people credited for the story was one James Kahn. One
wonders if this is the same James Kahn who's written a fair amount of SF,
including the novelization for _Return of the Jedi_. Hmm.
One final, general point: I find it very interesting that the complaints
raised from time to time on Usenet about TNG surfaced here...but with respect
to the Genome colony. Sterility, lack of initiative, lack of innovation, no
progress, no uncertainty; that about describes the colony they faced, and
IMHO shows that the arguments are a lot weaker when applied to the TNG crew.
I wonder if that was deliberate...
I think that about covers it. It was actually a good deal better than I
expected--I came in expecting something on the order of 3-5, and it's likely
to get higher than that. If they'd picked up the pace a little and cut the
Troi/romance plot entirely, we'd have had a *really* nice hard-hitting show.
As it is, some good issues well addressed, but an occasionally dull ride
getting there. So, maestro, the scoresheet: :-)
Plot: 8. Very solid for 2 out of 2.5 (Troi's is only half a plot in
importance :-) ).
Plot Handling: 6. It was well put together to show just how much trouble
they'd caused by their arrival, but more than a bit drawn-out.
Characterization: 8. Troi and Aaron (particularly the former) are the
weak links here; Picard was stellar.
TOTAL: 7.5 after a little twiddling. About twice what I was figuring on
giving it based on last week. That'll learn me. :-)
NEXT WEEK:
Y'know, in the middle of a war, having total amnesia about who you are and
what you're doing there is a truly bad thing.
Stay dry, all.
Tim Lynch (Cornell's first Astronomy B.A.; one of many Caltech grad students)
BITNET: tlynch@citjuliet
INTERNET: tly...@juliet.caltech.edu
UUCP: ...!ucbvax!tlynch%juliet.ca...@hamlet.caltech.edu
"I see your hunger for a fortune--it could be better served beneath my flag!
If you've the stomach for a broadside--come aboard, my pretty boys!
I...will take you, make you, everything you've ever dreamed."
--Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, "Pirates"
--
Copyright 1992, Timothy W. Lynch. All rights reserved, but feel free to ask...
Jose Gonzalez
>WARNING: The following article contains genetically engineered spoilers for
>this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
>want the gory details.
>
>the better. There's no need to bring in a possible *literal* contamination
>of the gene pool when the social side of it is working so damned well, and
>most of the scenes were extraordinarily drawn-out. This was a near-total
>loss.
I don't think so. This forced Aaron to think about the dilemma not only
in terms of his responsibilities to his society, but himself as well.
It made his desicion that much harder, because although he allowed the
others to leave, he was forced to stay, although he wanted desperately to
go. I think it added a more personal aspect to his decision.
--
Jose Gonzalez
Spock- "In your own way, you are as stubborn as another
captain of the Enterprise I once knew."
Picard-"Then I'm in good company, sir."
scott evans
>In <1992Feb13....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>
>>WARNING: The following article contains genetically engineered spoilers for
>>this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
>>want the gory details.
>
>
>
>>horrible, HORRIBLE name for what's actually not a bad concept--a bit of
>>neutron star flying around. (And they got the density of neutron star
>>material RIGHT! Miracles *DO* happen! :-) )
>
>change, but any chunk of neutron matter below about 0.6 M_\cdot is
>beta unstable (check out Shapiro and Teukolsky's book, and be sure to
>read the acknowledgements in the preface :-)) No way could they move
>it if it was big enough to exist. You can imagine me swearing at the
>TV when I saw this...
>
My problem was that the fragment was just too damn *big*. A complete
neutron star is only around 10km in diameter, if memory serves, so
this "fragment", being smaller, wouldn't be much larger than the big-E,
which is on the order of 1km in size (again, if memory serves. Somebody
from r.a.s.tech can comment). There was a distinct lack of rotation,
too. Also, would a fragment be able to maintain near-neutron density?
Is there enough gravity left?
>>And the VISOR's range (1 Hz to
>>100,000 THz, according to Geordi) at least has a decent upper limit; a 3 nm
>>wavelength boundary puts it right around high-energy UV or low X-rays, which
>>makes sense. The lower bound's absurd, though--1 Hz EM radiation works out
>>to a 300,000 *kilometer* wavelength, and that's not only silly to try to look
>>at, it's dead impossible given the size of the VISOR.
>
>Yeah, and remember the VISOR detects neutrinos :-(
Who needs to detect much beyond 21cm, anyway?
>
>
>>Tim Lynch (Cornell's first Astronomy B.A.; one of many Caltech grad students)
>>--
>>Copyright 1992, Timothy W. Lynch. All rights reserved, but feel free to ask...
>
>--
>--------
>Paul J. Schinder
>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Dept. of Astronomy, Cornell University
>schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov
Didya notice that Guy Vardaman was one of the engineering techs that
beamed to the "biosphere" then back?
I think I'm a little more optimistic about this one than Paul, but not
so as Tim. I'd give it a 6.
Scott Evans
Timothy W. Lynch
>In <1992Feb13....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>WARNING: The following article contains genetically engineered spoilers for
>>this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
>>want the gory details.
>>The social upheaval plot was, in some ways, TNG's take on "A Private Little
>>War". Not the competition angle of it, but the "damned if you do, damned if
>>you don't" prospects. Don't help 'em, and they die. Help 'em, and they may
>>kill themselves in gratitude. What a wonderful choice--and what a nasty,
>>nasty dilemma to get thrown in. (This sort of effect on the culture, BTW, is
>>exactly what TOS always used to gloss over; "The Return of the Archons" comes
>>to mind as the most vivid example of the "oh, well, we just took apart the
>>entire fabric of your society, and you'll suffer a lot, but at least you'll
>>be human now, la de dah" attitude that frequently turned me off.) Nice work
>>there.
>Agreed there, TOS did this quite a bit. It was one redeeming feature
>that they actually dealt with the beginnings of the problem here. I
>felt it to be pretty phoney, though; if people want to leave, maybe
>other people would want to come and could be recruited (there goes the
>genetic engineering, but that was obvious dreck even to someone who
>avoided biology in college like me).
Maybe. Not definitely (and if Picard is representative, not likely), and
probably with a great deal of delay. Given the genetic engineering aspect
present [bogus or no], the people already *in* the society would throw fits
to bring in such large amounts of outsiders.
>>Scientific Sense: some of each here. The "stellar core fragment" is a
>>horrible, HORRIBLE name for what's actually not a bad concept--a bit of
>>neutron star flying around. (And they got the density of neutron star
>>material RIGHT! Miracles *DO* happen! :-) )
>No, no, NO Tim! They may have gotten the *density* almost right for a
>change, but any chunk of neutron matter below about 0.6 M_\cdot is
>beta unstable (check out Shapiro and Teukolsky's book, and be sure to
>read the acknowledgements in the preface :-)) No way could they move
>it if it was big enough to exist.
Come on, now, Paul, be reasonable. (I just checked the preface, BTW...you
careful scrutinizer, you. :-) ) Okay, so there may be a stability problem
with low-mass versions of neutron star material--but that's a "loophole"/
subtlety that you can't possibly expect them to extend the effort to do.
They got a chunk of a neutron star with the right density and exhibiting
vaguely correct gravitational effects. To be honest, I think demanding they
go beyond the basic properties of the material to finesse the subtleties of
"well, this won't be stable" is not only unrealistic, but arrogantly so.
>>Oh, one other thing, though--Hannah's a *theoretical* physicist?
>>Riiiiiiight. That's why she's drawing up schematics of possible instruments.
>>Guys, doing theory does *not* usually mean you do everything shy of actually
>>building the thing; most theorists I know wouldn't even come close. Leave
>>her as a physicist and team her up with Geordi the ultracompetent engineer;
>>that's fine.
>Yeah, but this is typical TV sf.
So is making the reptilian creatures the bad guys--and Lisa's spoken up time
and time again about *that* one, let me tell you. :-)
>I call it "the scientist as artist".
This isn't nearly as bad as they've had in the past, though [brilliant doctors
also being computer experts and great instrument-builders, not to mention...].
>>One final, general point: I find it very interesting that the complaints
>>raised from time to time on Usenet about TNG surfaced here...but with respect
>>to the Genome colony. Sterility, lack of initiative, lack of innovation, no
>>progress, no uncertainty; that about describes the colony they faced, and
>>IMHO shows that the arguments are a lot weaker when applied to the TNG crew.
>Does it? With all that moral posturing the TNG crew seemed like their
>normal sterile selves...
Picard feeling very put upon, and very guilty over the absolutely no-win
scenario he'd ended up in is "sterile"? Wondering about the moral question
of "destroying a culture to save it" is "moral posturing"? Geordi being
*damn* smug about the solution he and Hannah came up with is the status
quo? Sorry...not to me.
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Feb13....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>WARNING: The following article contains genetically engineered spoilers for
>>this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
>>want the gory details.
>>The "Troi has a romance and then agonizes over it plot": well, the less said
>>the better. There's no need to bring in a possible *literal* contamination
>>of the gene pool when the social side of it is working so damned well, and
>>most of the scenes were extraordinarily drawn-out. This was a near-total
>>loss.
>I don't think so. This forced Aaron to think about the dilemma not only
>in terms of his responsibilities to his society, but himself as well.
He'd already done that--as soon as he told Troi that he found their visit
invigorating and stimulating, with all its attendant new people and new ideas,
he'd already invested an unconscious stake in the outcome. Oh, but of course
it's much stronger if he sleeps with Deanna. Right.
Tim Lynch
Timothy W. Lynch
[...]
Spoilers for "The Masterpiece Society" ahead:
[on the "stellar core fragment"]
>>>No, no, NO Tim! They may have gotten the *density* almost right for a
>>>change, but any chunk of neutron matter below about 0.6 M_\cdot is
>>>beta unstable (check out Shapiro and Teukolsky's book, and be sure to
>>>read the acknowledgements in the preface :-)) No way could they move
>>>it if it was big enough to exist.
>>Okay, so there may be a stability problem
>>with low-mass versions of neutron star material--but that's a "loophole"/
>>subtlety that you can't possibly expect them to extend the effort to do.
>Oh, yes, I can.
Not without looking pedantic. This is *mainstream television*. I don't
expect them to get every last subtlety of a scientific concept down any more
than I expect them to get every last legal loophole or medical terminology
right. Concentrate on the basics, and do your best on the details while still
getting things done on time. You're giving off the impression that the *only*
thing you care about is whether they happen to get the mass limit right, and
that's not good; I know better than that.
This isn't to say they couldn't be better with the science 99% of the time;
heaven knows they could. But doesn't it make more sense to be *less*
condemnatory when they're a lot closer to right than usual rather than even
more stressed?
>It wasn't at all essential to the story, so they either should have
>left it out or gotten it right.
As far as 99.9% of the viewing population is concerned, they *did* get it
right. That's the bottom line--it would have taken far too long to get
around the problem you mention.
You also ask [I deleted that part, sorry] what would have changed if it had
just been a random planet or asteroid hurtling toward them. Several things,
I think. First, asteroids are old hat for them: they've pulled or pushed
similar things out of the way with no problem. Second, asteroids are at a
nice low density--they could simply carve it into little pieces and tow them
away without any real problem at all.
[on the "theoretical physicist" designing instruments]
>>>Yeah, but this is typical TV sf.
Oh, so *here* being typical TV sf is a valid excuse, but above it's not?
I'd rather they get the presentation of the *people* right rather than the
celestial bodies, thanks.
>Certainly they have no clue as to how science is actually
>done (heck, they've never even *had* a fistfight between scientists :-)).
I must've seen too much MST3000 lately; the immediate reaction to this
statement was "Meanwhile, back at the Cody Institute for scientists who get
beat up a lot..." :-)
>>>Does it? With all that moral posturing the TNG crew seemed like their
>>>normal sterile selves...
>>Picard feeling very put upon, and very guilty over the absolutely no-win
>>scenario he'd ended up in is "sterile"?
>Sure. It's entirely in character for Picard, and in no way does Picard
>*ever* question the beliefs he holds.
Uh-huh. And two of those beliefs (a staunch anti-genetic engineering stance
and a strong devotion to noninterference) came into direct, visceral conflict.
He went with one and screwed up the other. I don't care whether that's
sterile or not; it's damned good drama and makes for quite interesting
people.
>>Wondering about the moral question
>>of "destroying a culture to save it" is "moral posturing"?
>No, but the whole bit about how awful the "genetically engineered"
>society is was moral posturing.
Maybe. Maybe not. Not everyone thought it was, after all--just Picard and a
few others. And even he didn't use that particular posture to justify
wrecking the social fabric wholesale, unlike another captain I could mention.
>And I'm not at all convinced that the culture is destroyed.
Nor am I--but the threat was definitely there. At the very least, it's
fundamentally altered, and there *will* be a lot of chaos and problems for
a while. And Picard is, indirectly, responsible for that.
>Sure. Just once this season, I'd like them to face a problem with no
>techincal solution. (To be sure, the moral dilemma *was* something
>like this.) Instead, we have this week's scientist dreaming up a
>"theory" (how'd she know about tractor beams in the first place, and
>how was she able to use Enterprise equipment so quickly?)
That's the "scientist as artist" at work again.
>to save the
>day. The show would have been more powerful if they had *failed*.
I don't think so--because then, no one has any choice [short of "we'll stay
here and die", which is overused]. Pyrrhic victories (which this basically
was) have a lot of power packed into them. And it's got to rankle that after
all the effort they took to save these people, they could end up on the scrap
heap before too long anyway...
Tim Lynch
Richard Gralnik
>It wasn't at all essential to the story, so they either should have
>left it out or gotten it right. They supposedly have "science
>experts". They live in a city that's lousy with universities. It's a
>local call to Cal Tech.
Not from Paramount studios it isn't. Paramount's on a tight budget here, and
Cal Tech won't accept collect calls.
(Although there's this one astrophysicist there who might for the chance to
be a technical consultant to Star Trek :-)
And are you calling our univsities lousy, or implying that they're all
infested?
Signed,
Waiting to go home on Friday afternoon
cs201139
to move a moon (and then Q wound up doing to for them), then how the heck
could they move a star fragment regardless of what tractor beam parameters
they set.
Timothy W. Lynch
>>[...]
>>Spoilers for "The Masterpiece Society" ahead:
>>Uh-huh. And two of those beliefs (a staunch anti-genetic engineering stance
>>and a strong devotion to noninterference) came into direct, visceral
>>conflict. He went with one and screwed up the other. I don't care whether
>>that's sterile or not; it's damned good drama and makes for quite interesting
>>people.
>Maybe it's because I kept starting and stopping the tape to watch the
>Olympics, but I didn't see it that way.
Maybe it was.
>Picard had no real choice in
>the matter, and as Riker did point out, the Prime Directive didn't
>apply here.
And as Picard pointed out right afterwards, whether the letter of the law
applied or not makes no difference to how he felt about it--*and shouldn't
have*. He had "no real choice" in that either way he went, something awful
happened. This is hardly a sterile or a dull situation--it's the very
essence of drama.
>So Picard's actions were forced, and his preaching about
>the colony was old time moralizing and had nothing to do with the
>"interference".
Agreed on the latter half of this, but it does tend to accent his choice to
interfere without working a little harder to make it as minimal as possible.
>Afterward he showed some regrets that things happened
>as they did, but all that happened was out of his control.
"Some regrets". Sheesh. I haven't seen him that wrought up over a mistake
since "Galaxy's Child"--and unlike then, this one made perfect sense.
>He wasn't
>about to order the Enterprise to let them die (nor do I think he would
>do so if the culture *was* one that the Prime Directive applied to).
It looks to me like you've never *been* in a no-win situation. Whether you
have a choice in the matter may affect how other people try to deal with you
afterwards, but it will have little or nothing to do (at least in my
experience) with how you *personally* will feel about the consequences of
your choice.
>>>The show would have been more powerful if they had *failed*.
>>I don't think so--because then, no one has any choice [short of "we'll stay
>>here and die", which is overused]. Pyrrhic victories (which this basically
>>was) have a lot of power packed into them. And it's got to rankle that after
>>all the effort they took to save these people, they could end up on the scrap
>>heap before too long anyway...
>Not a chance. The Federation would not let them end up on the "scrap
>heap". Their culture may change, but it doesn't have to be permanent.
Awfully confident about the Federation's abilities, aren't you? If the damage
to the society is as grave as Aaron was claiming, all the Federation can do is
come in and pick up the pieces. Some members of the society may survive, and
may manage to adjust to the new world; but the society as a whole, the culture
Picard and company found in the first place, *will* have been destroyed.
Completely inadvertently, and with the best of intentions, Picard and company
ended up playing God with a culture not their own--which, regardless of whether
they're "human" or not, violates the very essence of the Prime Directive.
Tim Lynch
John Grohol
>In article <1992Feb13....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>WARNING: The following article contains genetically engineered spoilers for
>>this week's TNG episode, "The Masterpiece Society". Steer clear unless you
>>want the gory details.
>>
>>The "Troi has a romance and then agonizes over it plot": well, the less said
>>the better. There's no need to bring in a possible *literal* contamination
>>of the gene pool when the social side of it is working so damned well, and
>>most of the scenes were extraordinarily drawn-out. This was a near-total
>>loss.
NOT!
Although the ending was predictable as hell, I think this is your
really average run ST:TNG... Not bad, not too great, but good enough.
Troi actually has a *relationship* for probably one of the few times
in the series... I don't know why she feels bad about it though, he
seemed like a nice guy! grin...
And of course this episode brought up some nice problems with the
"Prime Directive" and genetic engineering... Too bad they don't
address it too much, but they almost do... more grins...
Next week's episode looks much better... some actually nice
fight scenes...
--
"And from the dark secluded valleys :: John M. Grohol
I heard the ancient songs of sadness :: Cntr for Psychological Studies
But every step I thought of you :: Nova Univ, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Every footstep only you." -- Sting :: gro...@novavax.nova.edu
Just another theatre geek.....
>>schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul J. Schinder) writes:
>>>>Spoilers for "The Masterpiece Society" ahead:
>>>Picard had no real choice in
>>>the matter, and as Riker did point out, the Prime Directive didn't
>>>apply here.
>>And as Picard pointed out right afterwards, whether the letter of the law
>>applied or not makes no difference to how he felt about it--*and shouldn't
>>have*. He had "no real choice" in that either way he went, something awful
>>happened. This is hardly a sterile or a dull situation--it's the very
>>essence of drama.
>I don't agree at all. The key was that Picard had *no choice*. He
>was morally compelled to try to save them, however he felt about it.
But of course, this >IS< drama. Man vs. himself.
>Drama exists, to me at least, in difficult decisions between outcomes
>where a case can be made for both sides, whether or not either outcome
>is desirable. That's why I dislike preachy episodes where one
>protagonist is obviously wrong and played that way. Picard's decision
>was made for him, and the fact that the PD is something that Picard
>has broken before in more questionable circumstances makes it hard for
>me to believe that he'd agonize over this.
Basically, this was just a side issue for this show. But it is
certainly within his character to feel a great deal of unease of what
he did, no matter HOW necessary it was. Particularly since it seemed to
me that a lot of the unease was from his internal questioning of what else
he could have done to minimize the damage and that he DIDN't pull a rabbit
out of his hat as in the past.
I didn't see this as a
>show about Picard, but about Aaron. *Aaron's* decisions were harder,
>whether to stick to principles and allow his colony to die (unlikely,
>but a possibility depending on the depths of their conviction), or to
>keep them alive and try to deal with the consequences. I found him
>more interesting than Picard. Picard was being Picard, and his life
>wasn't going to change because of what happened.
Certainly true. This was Aaron's story through and through.
>But not necessarily forever. It's up to the colonists. The
>Federation isn't going to let them starve (the good old replicators
>will take care of that), nor is the Federation going to interfere if
>the colonists don't want them to. I frankly saw no reason for all the
>gloom. Vital members of the colony may leave, but so what? Surely
>the Federation has a spare physicist they could send temporarily, as
>well as whatever other support the colony might need. "Some members
>of the society may survive"? *All* of them will if they don't commit
>suicide.
The PEOPLE in the society might survive. But the SOCIETY itself,
the culture, may not.
>>Completely inadvertently, and with the best of intentions, Picard and company
>>ended up playing God with a culture not their own--which, regardless of whether
>>they're "human" or not, violates the very essence of the Prime Directive.
>Picard and company had a role that was entirely forced upon them.
>There was no choice for Picard. Would it have been better if the
>colonists had perished?
This is the wrong question to ask.
A better parallel is a policeman forced to shoot and kill one person
to save others. Yes, it's necessary, but there are still aftereffects,
there are still regrets, there are still psychological ramifactions. ANd
what we saw can fit in with that.
--
Roger Tang gwan...@milton.u.washington.edu
Executive Producer Emeritus, Asian Theatre at the UW;
The definition of having balls is a non-singer who goes karaoke singing
with the cast of a musical revue.
Timothy W. Lynch
>>>>[...]
>>>>Spoilers for "The Masterpiece Society" ahead:
>>And as Picard pointed out right afterwards, whether the letter of the law
>>applied or not makes no difference to how he felt about it--*and shouldn't
>>have*. He had "no real choice" in that either way he went, something awful
>>happened. This is hardly a sterile or a dull situation--it's the very
>>essence of drama.
>I don't agree at all. The key was that Picard had *no choice*. He
>was morally compelled to try to save them, however he felt about it.
>Drama exists, to me at least, in difficult decisions between outcomes
>where a case can be made for both sides, whether or not either outcome
>is desirable. That's why I dislike preachy episodes where one
>protagonist is obviously wrong and played that way.
So do I. This *wasn't one of them*. Picard's overt decision may have been the
right one, but no one felt happy about the consequences of it, and Picard's
anti-genetics stance was hardly being unequivocally made "obviously wrong [OR
right] and played that way".
>I didn't see this as a
>show about Picard, but about Aaron. *Aaron's* decisions were harder,
Agreed here, but saying "it wasn't his show" doesn't make Picard automatically
dismissable. Both leaders had certain choices to make, and in the end both
were more or less forced into their respective situations.
>>>Not a chance. The Federation would not let them end up on the "scrap
>>>heap". Their culture may change, but it doesn't have to be permanent.
>>Awfully confident about the Federation's abilities, aren't you? If the damage
>>to the society is as grave as Aaron was claiming, all the Federation can do
>>is come in and pick up the pieces. Some members of the society may survive,
>>and may manage to adjust to the new world; but the society as a whole, the
>>culture Picard and company found in the first place, *will* have been
>>destroyed.
>But not necessarily forever. It's up to the colonists.
The culture's survival is *not* entirely dependent on their own initiative.
The survival of some elements and members of it, yes; but the gestalt, no.
>I frankly saw no reason for all the gloom.
Then I don't really think we can come to any agreement on this. It seems to
me that having the underpinnings of your society kicked out from under you
[the "perfection" and ultimate "advancement" of the society being revealed for
the illusions they were] would be a major psychological blow to virtually
anyone, and would cause major upheaval. Others have already pointed out the
possible [and, I suspect, inadvertent] parallels to the Eastern Bloc and the
former Soviet Union; and all it takes to see the effect of the "perfect"
plan's fall there is a look at the evening news.
>Picard and company had a role that was entirely forced upon them.
>There was no choice for Picard. Would it have been better if the
>colonists had perished?
Depends on the future of the society. Would you prefer a quick death, or a
slow, agonizing one that comes from within?
Just another theatre geek.....
>> A better parallel is a policeman forced to shoot and kill one person
>>to save others. Yes, it's necessary, but there are still aftereffects,
>>there are still regrets, there are still psychological ramifactions. ANd
>>what we saw can fit in with that.
>Hmm, now we can have a battle of analogies... :-) I think a better
>analogy would be a physician who saves a patient's life by a procedure
>that is against the patient's religious convictions. A policeman
>shooting a person has harmed someone directly. Moving the rock didn't
>harm anyone directly. The colonists were, in a sense, betrayed by
>their ancestors who were so sure of the correctness of their
>principles that they cut themselves off from the rest of mankind.
>When their decendants were exposed to the outer world, some of them
>chose to take advantage of new possibilities.
Ummmm....that might be more true for Riker. But for someone like
Picard, who believes in the spirit and the letter of the law of the Prime
Directive, he has a stake in both saving them physically and saving them
culturally. A physician has no stake in a patient's religious convictions;
he does in their physical well being. But for Picard, as we have seen in
the past, it's a concern for both.
Just another theatre geek.....
>>In article <schinder....@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov> schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov writes:
>> Ummmm....that might be more true for Riker. But for someone like
>>Picard, who believes in the spirit and the letter of the law of the Prime
>>Directive, he has a stake in both saving them physically and saving them
>>culturally. A physician has no stake in a patient's religious convictions;
>>he does in their physical well being. But for Picard, as we have seen in
>>the past, it's a concern for both.
>Again I disagree. I don't think Picard has that great a concern for
>the PD.
HACK COUGH SPLUTTER WHEEZE!
He's bent it enough times in the past that, while he
>certainly takes it more seriously than Kirk ever did, it's pretty
>obvious that circumstances can override it.
It is pretty clear that Picard THINKS about the Prime Directive.
And its pretty clear also that Picard takes the Prime Directive very
seriously, both in its spirit and its letter. The prime examples, of
course, are SYMBIOSIS and WHO WATCHES THE WATCHERS. And while Picard has
bent it in JUSTICE and others, it is QUITE clear that he has a very
great concern for it; he understands the philosophy and its ramifications
and agrees with it.
The problem here is that his great abiding adherence to it comes
right smack dab against another one of his own, internatl philosophies.
And, like other people, he realizes that there are no easy answers when
two guiding principles conflict with each other, much as First Amendment
rights run up against national security, or the writ of habeus corpus
comes against military necessity.
As I said earlier in this
>thread, IMHO Picard would have saved the colony even if the PD had
>directly applied, letter as well as spirit (I would certainly *hope*
>so).
But the point here is that a person may have qualms about it
even when they think they've done the right thing.
Rick Shepherd
>In <1992Feb14.2...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul J. Schinder) writes:
>>>In <1992Feb14.1...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>[...]
>>Spoilers for "The Masterpiece Society" ahead:
>
(Much deleted)
>>>>Picard feeling very put upon, and very guilty over the absolutely no-win
>scenario he'd ended up in is "sterile"?
>>>Sure. It's entirely in character for Picard, and in no way does Picard
>>>*ever* question the beliefs he holds.
>>Uh-huh. And two of those beliefs (a staunch anti-genetic engineering stance
>>and a strong devotion to noninterference) came into direct, visceral conflict.
>>He went with one and screwed up the other. I don't care whether that's
>>sterile or not; it's damned good drama and makes for quite interesting
>>people.
>Maybe it's because I kept starting and stopping the tape to watch the
>Olympics, but I didn't see it that way. Picard had no real choice in
>the matter, and as Riker did point out, the Prime Directive didn't
>apply here. So Picard's actions were forced, and his preaching about
>the colony was old time moralizing and had nothing to do with the
>"interference". Afterward he showed some regrets that things happened
>as they did, but all that happened was out of his control. He wasn't
>about to order the Enterprise to let them die (nor do I think he would
>do so if the culture *was* one that the Prime Directive applied to).
Actually, in "Pen Pals", Picard *would* have let the whole race be
destroyed, due to the prime directive, if it had not been for Data's
"improper" communications with the young girl down on the planet which
had already altered the balance of the situation. Similarly, in the
episode with the "proto-vulcans", where the older native had fallen and
broken his back, Picard asks Crusher why she didn't just "let him die?"
I think here, the fact that the prime directive did not legally
apply, was what made the difference (though I agree that it is poor
continuity, etc. to say that it did not, only because they are human)
and yet, to Picard, the *spirit* or idea of not interefering is still
very important, so he is troubled with the situation and its only
apparent solution.
Just MHO. Other thoughts? Though Picard and crew have never yet HAD
to let a race or person die due to non-interference, would they
really do so? What do the rest of you think? (Or have they already,
and I'm just not remembering.)
Rick
--
|Rick D. Shepherd |Space Station Freedom| "Some use sharp remarks like|
|PRC c/o Lockheed |Software Environment | sword thrusts, but the words|
|1150 Gemini |Work = 1-713-282-6443| of the wise bring healing." |
|Houston TX 77058 |Home = 1-713-388-2907| Proverbs 12:18 <>< |
Stephen Dennison
>TOTAL: 7.5 after a little twiddling.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Boy, you just can't *drop* that Troi sub-plot, can you ! :-)
>About twice what I was figuring on giving it based on last week.
Y'know, Tim, I always wondered where you came up with the time to write
these. I rarely have the time to read them in their entierty, but this time
I did. Nice job, I agree with about 75% of your observations, but it brings
up a new question...
Do you lose sleep nights when you think about all the people who *read*
these on company time ? :-) *You* may be responsible for not a *small*
amount of the national debt !
>That'll learn me. :-)
We can only hope ... :-)
>
>NEXT WEEK:
>
>Y'know, in the middle of a war, having total amnesia about who you are and
>what you're doing there is a truly bad thing.
or
What if they threw a war, and everybody *forgot* to come ?
:-)
Stephen
Never confuse your dreams with the *things* you want. *Things* are matter
and matter can be neither created nor destroyed. Not so, dreams.
Timothy W. Lynch
afd...@lims05.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
>Do you lose sleep nights when you think about all the people who *read*
>these on company time ? :-) *You* may be responsible for not a *small*
>amount of the national debt !
No, no. We must also remember that Richard Arnold's departure from Paramount
may conceivably increase novel sales significantly, thus stimulating that
portion of the economy. :-)
Just wait 'til my State of the Union message, lemme tell ya...
Tim Lynch
Atsushi Kanamori
>Stephen, you're odd. :-)
>
>afd...@lims05.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
>
>>Do you lose sleep nights when you think about all the people who *read*
>>these on company time ? :-) *You* may be responsible for not a *small*
>>amount of the national debt !
>
>No, no. We must also remember that Richard Arnold's departure from Paramount
>may conceivably increase novel sales significantly, thus stimulating that
>portion of the economy. :-)
And the bulk of your reviews have surely caused a national increase
in the number of viewers watching TNG --> more advertising revenues.
Of course, my reviews probably cancel out that effect.
:-)
. . . . .
: : : :. : : :.. .: : . ::.: . ..: : .. : .
::::::::::.: :::::::.:::::::::::.:::::: ::::::::..:::
------------ -------------------------- --------------------------
TNG Lifelines: From "Yesterday's Enterprise" To "The Masterpiece Society"
"Plink, plink, plink, plunk. Plink, plink, plink, plunk. PLUNK...
PLUNK...plinkplink..." -- standard obligatory classical piano music
Just another theatre geek.....
>>>Again I disagree. I don't think Picard has that great a concern for
>>>the PD.
>> HACK COUGH SPLUTTER WHEEZE!
>Must be the flu season.
>In WWtW Picard broke the PD, period. It was shot to hell *before* he
>started interfering, but if we stick to the strict letter, he
>shouldn't have done anything (probably shouldn't have sent the
>Mintakan back to the planet, rather than relying on a mind wipe).
Oh, please, Paul. As I say repeatedly, Picard thinks about both
the spirit and the letter of the law. Because of the context, he took
a course of action that, to him, best represented the spirit of the
Prime Directive.
That indicates to me a characterization that takes the PD seriously.
Thus, there is no problem with Picard being disturbed at the end of
THE MASTERPIECE SOCIETY.
>Was "Symbiosis" the junkie episode? Then I agree with you there, he
>obeyed (a first for a Star Fleet captain) the PD in less than
>agreeable circumstances. In "Escape from the Planet of the Joggers"
>he broke the PD (the spirit if not the letter, it's not exactly clear
>there). So I don't see Picard as having such an overriding concern
>for the PD that he'll obey it every time. Personal whims, even minor
>ones, can obviously override it.
I don't look at these as personal or minor whims.
>> The problem here is that his great abiding adherence to it comes
>>right smack dab against another one of his own, internatl philosophies.
>>And, like other people, he realizes that there are no easy answers when
>>two guiding principles conflict with each other, much as First Amendment
>>rights run up against national security, or the writ of habeus corpus
>>comes against military necessity.
>Again, *he had no choice*. Saving the lives of an entire culture
>easily overrides the PD. The culture now has a fighting chance to
>live, where if Picard did nothing, it would have died. I don't see
>this as such a dilemma.
But Picard does. And it's been shown repeatedly in his past how
and why he does. Even if you do have to break a few eggs to get to
the omelette, you can still feel regret over the eggs.
Right now, this is an impasse. And we're playing out the
roles of Picard and Riker in "real life"....which ought to tell
you something...
Michael Rawdon
>In <1992Feb16....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul J. Schinder) writes:
>>>Picard had no real choice in
>>>the matter, and as Riker did point out, the Prime Directive didn't
>>>apply here.
>>And as Picard pointed out right afterwards, whether the letter of the law
>>applied or not makes no difference to how he felt about it--*and shouldn't
>>have*. He had "no real choice" in that either way he went, something awful
>>happened. This is hardly a sterile or a dull situation--it's the very
>>essence of drama.
>I don't agree at all. The key was that Picard had *no choice*. He
>was morally compelled to try to save them, however he felt about it.
>Drama exists, to me at least, in difficult decisions between outcomes
>where a case can be made for both sides, whether or not either outcome
>is desirable.
I agree. I don't think Picard's decision was very dramatic at all. The
drama in this episode came from issues like Troi and Conor's relationship
(should she stay? Should she not stay?) and the question of the "defecting"
colonists.
> That's why I dislike preachy episodes where one
>protagonist is obviously wrong and played that way. Picard's decision
>was made for him, and the fact that the PD is something that Picard
>has broken before in more questionable circumstances makes it hard for
>me to believe that he'd agonize over this.
Me, too. In fact I found the mention of the PD at the end to be entirely
gratuitous, an attempt to artificially inject drama into Picard's nonexistent
dilemma which failed.
> I didn't see this as a
>show about Picard, but about Aaron. *Aaron's* decisions were harder,
>whether to stick to principles and allow his colony to die (unlikely,
>but a possibility depending on the depths of their conviction), or to
>keep them alive and try to deal with the consequences. I found him
>more interesting than Picard. Picard was being Picard, and his life
>wasn't going to change because of what happened.
Aaron was certainly one of the major players. Troi and the colonist woman
were the others, I think. The drama in the episode came from them. It
certainly did not come from Picard. Picard didn't even wrestle for one
moment with the question of whether or not he SHOULD transport colonists
away from the planet. (Now that could have been interesting drama, though
it's questionable whether it would have been in character for Picard.)
--
Michael Rawdon
raw...@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
"Beauty... survives."
- James T. Kirk, "That Which Survives"
Just another theatre geek.....
>>>Again I disagree. I don't think Picard has that great a concern for
>>>the PD.
>> HACK COUGH SPLUTTER WHEEZE!
>Must be the flu season.
>In WWtW Picard broke the PD, period. It was shot to hell *before* he
>started interfering, but if we stick to the strict letter, he
>shouldn't have done anything (probably shouldn't have sent the
>Mintakan back to the planet, rather than relying on a mind wipe).
Oh, please, Paul. As I say repeatedly, Picard thinks about both
the spirit and the letter of the law. Because of the context, he took
a course of action that, to him, best represented the spirit of the
Prime Directive.
That indicates to me a characterization that takes the PD seriously.
Thus, there is no problem with Picard being disturbed at the end of
THE MASTERPIECE SOCIETY.
>Was "Symbiosis" the junkie episode? Then I agree with you there, he
>obeyed (a first for a Star Fleet captain) the PD in less than
>agreeable circumstances. In "Escape from the Planet of the Joggers"
>he broke the PD (the spirit if not the letter, it's not exactly clear
>there). So I don't see Picard as having such an overriding concern
>for the PD that he'll obey it every time. Personal whims, even minor
>ones, can obviously override it.
I don't look at these as personal or minor whims.
>> The problem here is that his great abiding adherence to it comes
>>right smack dab against another one of his own, internatl philosophies.
>>And, like other people, he realizes that there are no easy answers when
>>two guiding principles conflict with each other, much as First Amendment
>>rights run up against national security, or the writ of habeus corpus
>>comes against military necessity.
>Again, *he had no choice*. Saving the lives of an entire culture
>easily overrides the PD. The culture now has a fighting chance to
>live, where if Picard did nothing, it would have died. I don't see
>this as such a dilemma.
But Picard does. And it's been shown repeatedly in his past how
and why he does. Even if you do have to break a few eggs to get to
the omelette, you can still feel regret over the eggs.
Right now, this is an impasse. And we're playing out the
roles of Picard and Riker in "real life"....which ought to tell
you something...
Just another theatre geek.....
>In article <1992Feb18.2...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>Stephen, you're odd. :-)
Ah, but we always knew that...
>>afd...@lims05.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
>>>Do you lose sleep nights when you think about all the people who *read*
>>>these on company time ? :-) *You* may be responsible for not a *small*
>>>amount of the national debt !
>>No, no. We must also remember that Richard Arnold's departure from Paramount
>>may conceivably increase novel sales significantly, thus stimulating that
>>portion of the economy. :-)
>And the bulk of your reviews have surely caused a national increase
>in the number of viewers watching TNG --> more advertising revenues.
>Of course, my reviews probably cancel out that effect.
Oh, but you certainly overestimate the level of taste and
intelligence in American society today.....
Richard L. Gralnik
(to Tim Lynch regarding his weekly Review):
>
>Do you lose sleep nights when you think about all the people who *read*
>these on company time ? :-) *You* may be responsible for not a *small*
>amount of the national debt !
All us lazy, overpaid, underproductive American laborers object to this slur on
our work habits :-) (Pay no attention to the time stamp on this posting!)
Richard
Timothy W. Lynch
>> Oh, please, Paul. As I say repeatedly, Picard thinks about both
>>the spirit and the letter of the law. Because of the context, he took
>>a course of action that, to him, best represented the spirit of the
>>Prime Directive.
>With Kirk it was "I'll break the PD whenever I feel like it. I
>especially don't like societies run by computers". With Picard it's
>"I'll obey the PD unless I'm personally affected, then I'll break it".
Based on your last several articles, you're giving an excessive amount of
weight to "Justice", which was both very early TNG (before they'd really hit
their stride) and utter crap. Using it to justify a "pattern" seems to
be about as fair as me basing everything on "And the Children Shall Lead". :-)
Aside from his one mistake in "Justice", can you really find something which
is a break of the PD without strong, strong reason? I'd use "strong reason"
in this case to mean either saving a society's life ["Pen Pals", "The Master-
piece Society", etc.] or correcting the damage caused by a previous mistake
["Who Watches the Watchers"]. He's been very strict about keeping to it
without quite strong reasons, IMHO.
(I find it interesting that a year ago we argued over this, and you simply
claimed the PD was a lousy idea. Now, you appear to be falling back to
"well, TNG isn't any better about it...")
>In WWtW he went from a couple of
>Mintakans having seen some vaguely weird stuff to an entire village
>knowing about another civilization in the stars *solely* because
>Picard didn't think a religion was a good idea.
Not one based on an obviously false premise that *he personally* would be
responsible for, no. Yes, now they know of other worlds; but isn't basing
a society's beliefs on *truths* just a wee bit better than building castles
in the air? And if you can prevent the latter while (regrettably, perhaps)
building the former, isn't the former much to be desired?
I'm flabbergasted by your casual rejection of Picard's actions in WWtW as
unnecessary, or worse, a whim.
Timothy W. Lynch
[...]
>>Based on your last several articles, you're giving an excessive amount of
>>weight to "Justice", which was both very early TNG (before they'd really hit
>>their stride) and utter crap.
>Nevertheless it's canon TNG. (I agree that it's crap.)
Yet another reason to strike the word "canon" from the annals of Trek history.
When crap gets cited as "but it's still canon", and good stuff gets backhanded-
ly dismissed with "but it's not canon", resentment inevitably arises.
>>Aside from his one mistake in "Justice", can you really find something which
>>is a break of the PD without strong, strong reason? I'd use "strong reason"
>>in this case to mean either saving a society's life ["Pen Pals", "The Master-
>>piece Society", etc.] or correcting the damage caused by a previous mistake
>>["Who Watches the Watchers"]. He's been very strict about keeping to it
>>without quite strong reasons, IMHO.
>Much better than Kirk, but he'll break it.
Very true. Are you arguing that to "take it seriously", as you put it, he
needs to hold it to an absolute and *never* allow it to be broken for anything?
What utter nonsense. There are societal and ethical concerns involving the PD,
and *other* pressing societal and ethical concerns will alter the decision
accordingly.
>The claim was that the PD is an overriding moral
>imperative in Picard's life, and that's why he's upset in TMS. Yet
>we've never seen him sacrifice for it, and we have seen him break it.
Bzzt. Let's recall the end of "Who Watches the Watchers", shall we? Picard
was fully prepared to let Liko kill him to break the image of the all-powerful
Overseer, and thus minimize or contain the damage to the PD. If it had
actually happened, I think it might have been a *stronger* sacrifice than
Spock's action in ST2; here, the sacrifice is for an ideal rather than for
real, concrete people, and the latter is far easier to justify.
For someone who claims to love WWtW so much, you certainly seem to dismiss it
easily.
>Personally I think the PD *is* a lousy idea the way it's presented.
>We're told it's one of the Federation's highest laws. Yet there are
>no consequences when it's violated. Captains who violate it remain in
>command, and are eventually offered promotions. I'd rather they play
>it as vague moral imperitive rather than a law. "Try not to
>contaminate other cultures if you can avoid it, but if you feel it's
>necessary, it's permitted". That's the de facto PD as I see it,
>anyway.
I can agree with that, and I believe at this point that the TNG-era Federation
probably does interpret it that way (perhaps slightly more strongly, as in
"you'd better be able to justify why you did it"). Looking at it in that
sense (which I do), I think it's far easier to see Picard's faith in and
commitment to it. After all, which is more noble: adhering to some iron-
handed law, or following the moral precepts of your larger society?
>>>In WWtW he went from a couple of
>>>Mintakans having seen some vaguely weird stuff to an entire village
>>>knowing about another civilization in the stars *solely* because
>>>Picard didn't think a religion was a good idea.
>>Not one based on an obviously false premise that *he personally* would be
>>responsible for, no. Yes, now they know of other worlds; but isn't basing
>>a society's beliefs on *truths* just a wee bit better than building castles
>>in the air?
>What reinforces the truth? What evidence do the Mintakan's have
>several generations from then that it ever happened?
What reinforces the lie? The lie is one rooted in the society's past; the
truth will have eyewitness accounts (admittedly prone to probable distortion
in later generations), and will have somewhat more rational thought underlying
it. (If the village there keeps written records, there might also be less
distortion.)
Now, admittedly, I'm arguing with something of a bias, because I tend to
share Picard's sentiments about organized religion. But even so...
>Aren't they just
>as likely to form a religion around these stories of people who fly
>among the stars and do wondrous things as they are from the much more
>limited contamination that occured before Picard decided to directly
>interfere?
Is Erich von Daniken's stuff given to more or less of a following than most
religions organized around miracles?
In other words...no, I don't think so. And even if so, I (and probably Picard,
he thought arrogantly :-) ) would tend to claim that if they're going to form
somewhat irrational religions, it's at least better to base it on "miracles"
that the crew actually CAN do rather than on a pipe dream.
>He built fairy castles of inquisitions and crusades in his imagination
>out of what was up to that time a limited contamination. If the
>Mintakans are as rational as they were made to be, whatever temporary
>return to religion among a few people in a single village quite
>possibly would have died out.
Possibly. But remember, they'd only recently shrugged the old Overseer-
worship off anyway; and the impetus to fall back to something safe is
very powerful. [Look at Buchanan's isolationism for a real-life example.]
>>I'm flabbergasted by your casual rejection of Picard's actions in WWtW as
>>unnecessary, or worse, a whim.
>It wasn't unnecessary. I probably would have done the same thing in
>his shoes. But recognize it for what it was. It *was* a whim based
>on Picard's personal distaste for religion.
I strongly disagree. Anything with as much *visible* thought behind it
[Picard's repeated insistence on another choice did have a reason behind it,
you know] and rooted in such deeply held beliefs cannot possibly be called a
whim. Call it unwise if you wish, but I think "whim" is a truly bad term.
>And it definitely was a
>violation of the PD. Picard, like Kirk, has his own set of criteria
>about the PD. Picard's are simply closer to the spirit of the PD than
>Kirk's were. ========================================================
===========
And isn't that the whole point? Picard will break the letter of the PD to
protect its spirit, and in extreme circumstances [TMS and "Pen Pals"] will
break it entirely. I think that rather nicely illustrates the commitment
to the PD that you so decry.
>We should probably move this to .misc if you want to continue.
Agreed; and followups are set there.
Michael Rawdon
>In article <schinder....@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov> schi...@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov writes:
>>In <1992Feb17.0...@u.washington.edu> gwan...@milton.u.washington.edu (Just another theatre geek.....) writes:
>>> A better parallel is a policeman forced to shoot and kill one person
>>>to save others. Yes, it's necessary, but there are still aftereffects,
>>>there are still regrets, there are still psychological ramifactions. ANd
>>>what we saw can fit in with that.
>>Hmm, now we can have a battle of analogies... :-) I think a better
>>analogy would be a physician who saves a patient's life by a procedure
>>that is against the patient's religious convictions. A policeman
>>shooting a person has harmed someone directly. Moving the rock didn't
>>harm anyone directly. The colonists were, in a sense, betrayed by
>>their ancestors who were so sure of the correctness of their
>>principles that they cut themselves off from the rest of mankind.
>>When their decendants were exposed to the outer world, some of them
>>chose to take advantage of new possibilities.
> Ummmm....that might be more true for Riker. But for someone like
>Picard, who believes in the spirit and the letter of the law of the Prime
>Directive,
I don't buy this characterization of Picard. Events in "Justice", "Who
Watches The Watchers" and (indirectly) "The Drumhead" say to me that he
recognizes that the Prime Directive must be bent or broken at times (an
understatement, in my opinion, but that's beside the point) and is willing
to do so when necessary.
> he has a stake in both saving them physically and saving them
>culturally.
Yes, but it was impossible for him to even attempt to save them culturally
without saving them physically. Moreover, his Prime Directive convictions
as applied to this episode fall down ENTIRELY in my eyes when you consider
his willingness, and, in fact, his expressed sense of OBLIGATION, to
transport those colonists who want to leave the colony. He utterly rejected
the other side of the issue, with very little discussion. This says to me
that his "stake" in saving them culturally was not very strong to begin
with. Certainly at the very least it seems to take a clear backseat to two of
his other convictions (ensuring their survival and preserving their individual
freedoms).
I think his "stake" in saving them culturally, as portrayed in "Masterpiece"
was weakly handled at best. It seemed very artificial, growing out of a
desire on the part of the writers to insert Grand Moral Quandries into a
story (where, on the issue of simply ensuring the colony's survival, none
existed), rather than growing out of Picard's character.
In short, I disagree with you right down the line. :-)
--
Michael Rawdon
raw...@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
"Can this world not do better than you for a champion?"
"Probably. I just do the best I can."
- The Brigadier
Doctor Who, "Battlefield"
[Probably misquoted]
John T. whelan
>Again I disagree. I don't think Picard has that great a concern for
>the PD. He's bent it enough times in the past that, while he
>certainly takes it more seriously than Kirk ever did, it's pretty
>obvious that circumstances can override it. As I said earlier in this
>thread, IMHO Picard would have saved the colony even if the PD had
>directly applied, letter as well as spirit (I would certainly *hope*
>so).
I wouldn't be too sure about that. He was willing to let the
entire population of a planet be wiped out in "Pen Pals" because of
the letter of the Prime Directive. It all depends how this week's
writer it interpreting Picard's convictions.
John Whelan
--
"You can't possibly be a scientist if you
mind people thinking that you're a fool."
-- Wonko the Sane, _So_Long,_
_and_Thanks_for_All_the_Fish_