Lynch's Spoiler Review: "The First Duty"
Timothy W. Lynch
this week's TNG episode, "The First Duty". Those not wishing to be caught
off-guard by spoilers before seeing the show are advised to stand clear.
My, that was surprisingly good!
A few little nitpicks here and there, but all in all I really enjoyed this.
More after Ye Olde Synoppe, Sis:
As the Enterprise heads to Starfleet Academy for Picard's commencement
address, Picard receives word of an accident in which Wes was involved while
he and his flight team, the Nova Squadron, were practicing maneuvers. He's
fine, but one of the team members, Josh Albert, was killed, and an
investigation is underway, headed by Admiral Brand, the Academy
superintendent. Picard offers to help, but there's no need.
Picard explores the grounds before the hearing, and finds the old
groundskeeper Boothby, who helped him through trying times when he was a
student there. Boothby dismisses Picard's attempts at thanks, saying that
what Picard's done with his life since is thanks enough, and that he didn't
do anything. "You knew what you had to do, what was the right thing. I just
made sure you listened to yourself." Meanwhile, the squadron leader,
Nicholas Locarno, gives the squadron a pep talk before the hearing, saying
that everything will be fine--as long as they stick together. Nick
testifies, saying that while in a "diamond-slot" formation, they entered a
maneuver called a Jaeger loop, and that nine seconds later, Josh Albert's
ship crashed into another cadet's, causing the eventual destruction of all
five ships.
Cadet Hajar, the cadet whose ship Josh crashed into, testifies that the ships
did not deviate from their flight plan--and when pressed, admits that they
did, but by amounts small enough that she didn't feel it was important. She
also claims not to have seen Josh break formation, being unaware of a problem
until her proximity alarm went off. Cadet Sito, who was in the rear, also
claimed not to have, saying she was flying only on sensor readings at the
time--but when pressed, cannot even describe the orientation of Josh's ship.
Nick breaks in, saying that lately, Josh had been having "difficulties" in
formation flying, and that he must have panicked. Admiral Brand is very
disturbed by this news, and adjourns the hearing until the following day,
when data from Wes's flight recorder should be ready. "Everything's fine,"
Nick tells Wes. "Trust me."
As Picard, citing Wes as "one of our own", asks Geordi and Data to examine
the evidence themselves, Wes protests Nick lying at the investigation, saying
that he said no one would have to lie. Nick responds by saying that he
*didn't* lie, that Josh probably did panic and "we all know it".
Reluctantly, Sito and Hajar agree. Nick says that the only data recoverable
from Wes's recorder is all before the collision, so that as long as Wes
doesn't volunteer extra information, all will be fine. And after all, as
Sito points out, if they said what *really* happened, they all might as well
start packing. Nick tells Wes that he knows what it's like to count on a
team for his life, since he's been out in space.
Despite qualms about this, compounded by Josh's father apologizing to Wes for
Josh letting them all down, Wes sticks to the story when describing the
recorder's data. He adds nothing, and when asked whether the ships remained
in formation just after the Jaeger loop, firmly says yes. Data from a
navigational satellite around Saturn is then shown, proving without a doubt
that the ships were NOT in formation seven seconds after the loop was
completed. "What is your explanation, Mister Crusher?" "I have none, sir."
Beverly attempts to comfort Wes, but her firm belief that the data was
somehow tampered with to frame Wes only upsets him more, and he begs her not
to try to protect him from any of this. Picard talks to Boothby, and finds
that the Nova Squadron is considered heroes by the entire Academy, and that
Nick Locarno's personal charm and magnetism is what holds the team together.
"If he asked them to do something," Boothby says, "they'd do it. Even if it
means going right over a cliff." When Geordi and Data find that Wes's
coolant interlock was open just before the crash, and that one of the reasons
for doing that is to purge drive plasma (a dangerous move likely to ignite
the plasma), Picard realizes that that's exactly what they were trying to
do...
Picard calls Wes into his ready room and shows him a simulation of a maneuver
known as the Kolvord Starburst--a very flashy, very spectacular, and very
dangerous flight stunt. It's been banned at the Academy for over a hundred
years, ever since a group of cadets tried it and failed, all five losing
their lives in the process. Picard reasons that Nick Locarno wanted his
Academy career to go out with a blaze of glory, and that he talked the rest
of them into learning the stunt, and then covering up the truth when disaster
ensued. When he asks Wesley if that is correct, Wes first remains silent,
then chooses not to answer.
Picard is livid, for Wes has already *given* an answer to the inquiry, and
that answer was a lie. Wes protests that it was not a lie, but Picard
angrily points out that "a lie of omission is still a lie!" He reminds Wes
of his first day on board, when even annoyed at Wes's apparent presumption on
the bridge, Picard was impressed at the depth of his knowledge. He goes on
to say that ever since he made Wes an acting ensign, he'd always been
convinced that Wes would be a superb officer--until now. "The first duty of
a Starfleet officer is to the truth--be it scientific truth, historical
truth, PERSONAL truth. It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet was
founded!" And, he continues, if Wes cannot face up to the truth, then he
doesn't *deserve* to wear a Starfleet uniform. Picard presents Wes with a
simple choice: either Wes tells Admiral Brand what really happened, or
Picard will. Period. End of discussion--and Picard shouts Wes out of the
room.
Wes, panicked, tells Nick that Picard knows everything. Nick, upon hearing
Picard has no evidence, says there's no problem, that all they need to do is
deny Picard's theory. Wes balks at this, unable to call Picard a liar--but
Nick lambastes Wes for having the arrogance to decide the fates of all four
of them by his own single actions. He says that the team, Nova Squadron, is
bigger than any one of them. He says that without hesitation, if he were in
Wes's position he'd resign his commission rather than turn the team in, and
he urges Wes to do the same.
The hearing comes to a close. Brand says she is very disappointed and
disturbed by the inconsistencies between the data and the squadron's
statements, and says it suggests that they have been lying. However, since
they have no proof, they close the investigation by only giving them each a
formal reprimand and terminating their flight privileges. "This hearing is
concluded."
"Sir." Wesley rises. "I would like to add something to my testimony..."
Wes confesses all, and tells Josh's father outright that Josh didn't let them
down. Nick, when asked if he has anything to add, simply says no.
Later, Picard talks to Wesley on the grounds. Nick has been expelled, and
the rest of them nearly were--except that Nick pleaded to take full
responsibility, saying that he pressured them all into it. As he said he
would, Nick went down for the team. Wes feels awful, but Picard isn't
finished. In addition to the reprimand, Wes's credits for the year have been
revoked, and he will not advance with his class--he will pay for his actions.
And what's more, he'll remain on campus, with everyone knowing what he did.
"You have difficult times ahead."
Wes stares at the ground, downcast.
"You knew what you had to do. I just made sure that you listened to
yourself. Goodbye, Cadet."
"Goodbye, Captain." The two part company.
Well, now that that's over...
Y'know, I'm really starting to wonder why series *dedicated* to "courtroom
drama" don't attract me more. This was, in some ways, the functional
successor to "The Measure of a Man" and "The Drumhead" in its focus on a
particular investigation; and like the above two shows, it was highly
enjoyable.
I expect some will complain that the plot was too predictable, or too
straightforward in some way. I don't quite agree. Yes, the grand design
unfolded about the way I expected it to, but the little twists and turns it
took getting there did not. Some examples:
We all knew that Wes would come through with the truth eventually.
BUT: I didn't expect him to stonewall as long as he did, or to refuse to
answer a *direct question from Picard*.
We all knew that Locarno would push as many hot buttons as he could and
attempt to dissuade Wes from talking, and that he was mostly to blame.
BUT: I certainly was surprised to find out at the end that his "the team is
more important than the individual" speech was sincere enough that he was
willing to sacrifice himself for the team. That was a big surprise.
I, for one, had a feeling from the preview and past experience that Picard
was somehow going to end up intimately involved with the investigation.
Fortunately, he didn't. Yes, the Enterprise certainly got involved--but they
didn't have to, and Picard's request to formally assist was turned down
outright. Picard decided to help because "Wesley's one of our own"--a rather
strong acknowledgement and indication of the depth of TNG's relationships.
Nice.
Another interesting character bit was Bev's absolute "my-son-can-do-no-wrong"
naivete even after it was rather clear that Wes's story didn't hold up. Now,
Picard or Riker might have very well said similar things to Wes that Bev did
there (i.e. "I know you're telling the truth, but we need to..."), but they'd
have done it with ulterior motives: to try to guilt-trip Wes into confessing
by himself. Beverly looked and sounded *absolutely sincere*. That's almost
scary, but hardly out of character. I found it quite interesting. (Along
similar lines, her reaction to hearing of Wes's accident seemed very right as
well; knowing it rationally, but falling apart deep down anyway.)
I'll get back to characterization later, but a bit on the actual plot itself.
It seemed pretty solidly put together, for the most part. One small
objection I did have was the oft-used "the Enterprise solves the mystery when
no one else can" bit. It's less objectionable here than it's been
occasionally, but I saw no obvious reason from within the story why the
Enterprise crew could figure it out when the Academy investigators couldn't.
Actually, I should amend that. The investigators might well have noticed the
cooling interlocks open, as Data and Geordi did. All we'd need is for them
not to make the connection to the Kolvord Starburst that Picard did. That's
possible, though a tad unlikely; and it does beg the question of just why
Picard knows it so well.
Beyond that, everything hung together quite well, I thought. The initial
"there's been an accident..." teaser was quite a surprise for those seeing
the preview; and for those who didn't, it probably suggested he'd been badly
hurt, or even killed. Nicely misdirected (and it was *another* short teaser;
hmm, I see a trend :-) ). The investigation was methodical, and certainly
didn't make out the investigators to be complete dunces, as has occasionally
happened in the past. This time they were very suspicious, and with good
reason--they just couldn't prove it.
(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise. The fact that Picard didn't use that,
and let Wes decide on slightly more abstract grounds, speaks well of him and
of those crafting the show.)
Incidentally, this marks the writing debut of TNG advisor Naren Shankar. And
while I know you're going to have cautions accepting this after I was
deceived with respect to "Violations", this time the writer really *IS* a
friend of a friend. He's been, if I remember rightly, a technical advisor of
sorts to TNG for a few years (and yes, "Yesterday's Enterprise" NARENdra III
is named for him), but he's finally broken through into scripting. Nicely
done, too (and we've never met or corresponded, so I don't think there's any
bias at play here). (I also, to be fair, don't know how much of this was
Naren Shankar and how much was Ron Moore--both were credited.)
This also means that the science was slightly more on-the-ball than usual.
Not much needed to be done, but it was nice to see more astronomical
terminology than usual done (for example, not that many writers use moons of
Saturn other than Titan, and it was nice to hear Mimas brought up), and at
least enough sense to acknowledge that, for example, statistical mechanics
*is* one of the most mathematics-intensive fields of physics. It's a minor
point, mostly, but it was interesting.
Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
choice. On the other hand, Jacqueline Brooks' Admiral Brand really *is* a
lot like several school principals I've known, and Picard's comments about
her early on rang true. (That conversation of comparing superindentents in
the teaser, BTW, was another nice scene.)
Ray Walston was a superb Boothby. I have to admit that when I initially
heard he was playing the part, I had qualms; memories of "My Favorite
Martian" were too strong. :-) But he played Boothby rather as I'd expected
the character to be: rather piercingly observant, but also rather surly and
taciturn about it. Yes, it's a bit of a stereotype, but he played it well
enough that I'm willing to forgive it. (It wouldn't have worked without the
link to Picard, either; that set up a lot of interesting parallels.)
Ed Lauter was an interesting LCDR Albert (the dead cadet's father). He was
tough to get a handle on, but he seemed a very sensibly written character,
and inadvertently pushed all the right buttons with Wes when he returned
Wes's sweater. Interesting.
The two cadets of Nova Squadron besides Wes and Locarno (Hajar and Sito) were
fine--nothing seemed particularly wonderful, but they didn't need to do much.
They did manage to get across a certain ambivalence about what they were
doing, which played up Locarno's magnetism in creating the whole mess in the
first place. Locarno's "we three have no problem with this" and "we all know
it" obviously made assumptions it shouldn't--and that was the point. So,
they certainly did what they needed to.
Then, there's Nick Locarno. I thought he went slightly overboard in his final
scene with Wes, but only slightly. Apart from that, he definitely managed to
give off the air of, as Boothby put it, "coach, surrogate father, and best
friend all in one" to the rest of Nova Squadron. He really felt like a born
leader--and as I'm sure others noticed, he seemed rather a Kirk-figure in
many ways (right down to the way he walked at times). His arguments started
to ring false for me in his final scene with Wes, which wasn't so good--but
the revelation at the end that he truly meant every one of them, to the point
of taking the fall himself, lends a bit of poignancy to the whole thing.
Very, very nice.
And finally, we have Wes. Written to perfection, for possibly the first
time. And performed to perfection, for possibly the first time. I don't
know precisely what I can say here. The story was written around three
people: Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and Picard). He had to
choose and he did; and he chose well.
The regulars were...well, were basically Picard and Bev, first of all;
nobody else had more than three minutes of air-time. I've already taken care
of Bev; she was fine, and also far less essential. Picard was *superb*.
The best example of this, and in fact the best character interplay I've seen
in months, had to be the Picard/Wes scene in his ready room. I could not
stop watching--literally. The scene, more than anything else, illustrated
just how strong Picard's fatherly feelings are for Wesley, and just *how*
upset and let down by Wes's actions he was. I honestly thought for a second
when Wes chose not to answer (a shocker in itself) that Picard was going to
slap him. (Of course, Picard's patented Withering Stare is much worse...
:-) ) Picard was truly stunned by Wes's stonewalling, and almost lost
complete control--he certainly ended up at the boiling point. Locarno's
"must have been a hell of a speech" was probably just the wrong thing to say,
because it WAS a hell of a speech; everyone I've talked to felt vicariously
guilty after hearing it. The Picard/Wes relationship is probably the most
evolved of the entire show, and this demonstrated that to all watching. I
can't praise this scene enough.
The direction was mostly good, though not top-notch. It was fairly dynamic
in some cases (the slow pan around the "courtroom" in several of the
investigation scenes, for example), and that mostly worked. And *most* of
the closeups worked--certainly, that of Wes when the navigational data
appears did, as did Picard's shocked stare at Wes when he refuses to answer.
The only one I really remember as jarring was the very first one of Admiral
Brand when she's addressing the hall--that one just seemed unnecessary and
out of place.
The very few other problems I had were simply of things we didn't see. I'd
have liked to see at least one scene with Beverly *after* Wes's confession,
or at least after Picard finds out what Wes has done. I'd have liked to see
one scene between Boothby and Wes. I'd have liked to see the final scene
between Wes and Picard go on slightly longer.
But that's a wish list--not necessarily a realistic fault-finding.
Finally, the conclusion was nice to see, in that we saw that actions *do have
consequences*, and that Wes *did* get taken down a few pegs for his rashness.
I know an awful lot of fans who have been wanting for years to see Wes
actually do something wrong and get nailed for it, and I rather suspect Wil
Wheaton's felt the same way. This did it, in spades. (As a corollary, of
course, if everything's fine and dandy with no references to this next time
we see Wes, I shall be quite displeased.) Picard's earlier scenes with
Boothby, while in part a major tease (just what DID Picard do?), also served
to set up a lot of good parallels with the finale. One wonders if Picard
will ever tell anyone that he was behind Wes's coming forward. (I doubt it.)
Nice.
Now, some short takes:
--I absolutely adored that SFA logo Okuda and Sternbach put right before the
navigational tape played. It's the sort of thing that will be on jackets in
six months, I assure you--but it also looked fantastic. ("Scientia ex
astra"--knowledge out of the stars. Ahh.) And now that they've decided the
Federation was founded in 2161, I notice the staffers are putting that date
in wherever they get a chance. :-)
--Picard's bit about "the first duty...is to the truth, be it scientific
truth, historical truth, *personal truth*...", in addition to being nicely
stated, strikes me as something that could be a very subtle slam at the wave
of "Holocaust Revisionists" that are appearing more and more these days. No
argument here.
--Did my eyes deceive me, or was the sweater Wes loaned Josh one of those
rainbow sweaters from his first season? Boy, Josh must have been
small--there's no way those things fit Wes any more! :-) (Unless he
continued to wear that fashion afterward...oh, no, it's too horrible to
contemplate...)
--Possibly the best line of the show (certainly the best nonserious one):
"What happened to your hair?"
--A Betazoid superintendent...brrr, what a thought. Could you imagine
Lwaxana Troi as a principal? The mind boggles.
--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
Well, that ought to do it. It wasn't quite perfect, but it was a good watch,
and a very solid outing. Good luck, Wes; see you next season.
So, the numbers:
Plot: 9. A mild problem with why the Enterprise crew figured out what
happened while the investigators didn't, but otherwise solid.
Plot Handling: 9. Not quite stunning, but very nice.
Characterization: 9. If Locarno had been *ever* so slightly less over-the-
top in his last scene with Wes, and if Satelk had been even
remotely convincing, this would be higher.
TOTAL: Looks like a 9. Very nice.
NEXT WEEK: A rerun, so we all get a breather...phew. :-)
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
"We thought we could do it. We thought we could do ANYTHING..."
--W. Crusher
--
Copyright 1992, Timothy W. Lynch. All rights reserved, but feel free to ask...
brian_...@isd.jpl.nasa.gov
(Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>Now, some short takes:
>
>--I absolutely adored that SFA logo Okuda and Sternbach put right before the
>navigational tape played. It's the sort of thing that will be on jackets in
>six months, I assure you--but it also looked fantastic. ("Scientia ex
>astra"--knowledge out of the stars. Ahh.) And now that they've decided the
>Federation was founded in 2161, I notice the staffers are putting that date
>in wherever they get a chance. :-)
Actually, in the Novelties section of the new Advanced Comics (last week's)
there were several buttons and other paraphernalia that featured almost
every new logo seen in this episode. If you were to order these items today
you'd probably get them in 3 - 6 months. Good call!
>--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
There are probably several Academy campuses. The logo for the campus seen
in First Duty was for San Francisco. The triangular logo, with the rising or
setting sun under the Golden Gate bridge, reads "Starfleet Academy - San
Francisco - Sol Sector" which implies that there are other campuses in other
sectors, maybe even other cities on Earth (like Minsk).
-- Brian
brian_...@isd.jpl.nasa.gov
Jose Gonzalez
>this week's TNG episode, "The First Duty". Those not wishing to be caught
>off-guard by spoilers before seeing the show are advised to stand clear.
>My, that was surprisingly good!
Not surprisingly, I was hoping it would be this good! (-:
>Well, now that that's over...
>
>Y'know, I'm really starting to wonder why series *dedicated* to "courtroom
>drama" don't attract me more. This was, in some ways, the functional
>successor to "The Measure of a Man" and "The Drumhead" in its focus on a
>particular investigation; and like the above two shows, it was highly
>enjoyable.
It wasn't quite as good as the those two, but it was without a doubt the
best Wesley episode to date.
>We all knew that Wes would come through with the truth eventually.
>BUT: I didn't expect him to stonewall as long as he did, or to refuse to
>answer a *direct question from Picard*.
I was cringing during that scene. We're not used to seeing Picard biting
off the head of his crew this way, but Wesley is, for all intents and
purposes, his *son*, so it made sense.
>I, for one, had a feeling from the preview and past experience that Picard
>was somehow going to end up intimately involved with the investigation.
>Fortunately, he didn't. Yes, the Enterprise certainly got involved--but they
>didn't have to, and Picard's request to formally assist was turned down
>outright. Picard decided to help because "Wesley's one of our own"--a rather
>strong acknowledgement and indication of the depth of TNG's relationships.
>Nice.
Yeah, that line struck a cord in me as well.
>
(Along
>similar lines, her reaction to hearing of Wes's accident seemed very right as
>well; knowing it rationally, but falling apart deep down anyway.)
I don't know about that scene. I could see what she was *trying* to do, but
I think she did too much of it. I was getting apathy from her when that was
clearly not intended.
>(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
>Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
>contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
>not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
>within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise.
I doubt this, Picard would have forgiven him, regardless of what he said. He
would have been dissapointed in him to be sure, but he knows what kind of
character he has, and one mistake (even a big moral one such as he would have
been making) is not enough to make Picard abandon Wesley.
>Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
>as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
>an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
>actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
>and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
>choice.
I thought he did a decent job for the tact that he chose. I don't assume that
all Vulcans are going to be unemotional. People comes in all varieties, and
Vulcans do as well I'm sure. Perhaps he's simply a Vulcan who chose not to
study the disciplines quite as strongly.
>And finally, we have Wes. Written to perfection, for possibly the first
>time. And performed to perfection, for possibly the first time. I don't
>know precisely what I can say here.
I don't know, I thought his character was handled perfectly in "The Dauphin"
and "Final Mission." And Wheaton has always done a nice job with the material
he's been given.
>
>The best example of this, and in fact the best character interplay I've seen
>in months, had to be the Picard/Wes scene in his ready room. I could not
>stop watching--literally. The scene, more than anything else, illustrated
>just how strong Picard's fatherly feelings are for Wesley, and just *how*
>upset and let down by Wes's actions he was. I honestly thought for a second
>when Wes chose not to answer (a shocker in itself) that Picard was going to
>slap him. (Of course, Picard's patented Withering Stare is much worse...
>I can't praise this scene enough.
Agreed, best scene of an episode with lots of good ones.
>Finally, the conclusion was nice to see, in that we saw that actions *do have
>consequences*, and that Wes *did* get taken down a few pegs for his rashness.
>I know an awful lot of fans who have been wanting for years to see Wes
>actually do something wrong and get nailed for it, and I rather suspect Wil
>Wheaton's felt the same way. This did it, in spades. (As a corollary, of
>course, if everything's fine and dandy with no references to this next time
>we see Wes, I shall be quite displeased.)
Yeah, I was surprised at the harshness of the punishment. Short of expelling
him, this is the worst thing they could do to him. Depending on how shallow
his friendships are right now, he could be looking at some rough times ahead.
>--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
Well, the military acedemies now play against normal colleges nowadays, I don't
see why this would change.
>TOTAL: Looks like a 9. Very nice.
Ditto. Solid but not perfect.
--
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."
michael p.herlihy
>this week's TNG episode, "The First Duty". Those not wishing to be caught
>off-guard by spoilers before seeing the show are advised to stand clear.
>...maneuver called a Jaeger loop...
I thought this maneuver was called a Yeager loop named after:
Chuck Yeager - the first person to break the sound barrier
Richard L. Gralnik
Ok, Tim has lain the groundwork with his fine Synoppe-sis (sic). Now we all
get to agree or disagree. Of course disagreeing is more fun :-) It's too
easy to 'me too' the stuff you agree with.
In article 13...@cco.caltech.edu, tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>
>We all knew that Locarno would push as many hot buttons as he could and
>attempt to dissuade Wes from talking, and that he was mostly to blame.
>BUT: I certainly was surprised to find out at the end that his "the team is
>more important than the individual" speech was sincere enough that he was
>willing to sacrifice himself for the team. That was a big surprise.
>
I'd have to say it was a big surprise because up until then I didn't like Locarno
and certainly couldn't see anybody following him to the ends of the earth or
anywhere else for that matter. They guy struck me as stuck up, selfish,
conceited and arrogant (I think that about sums it up.) I kept waiting for
Wes to tell him to take a hike or worse. If that's the kind of person he (and
the rest of the academy) worships I have to wonder how good a judge of character
he is.
>Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
>as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
>an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
>actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
>and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
>choice.
I have to agree with Tim here. I thought the Vulcan guy went to the Tomaluk
school of acting. I kept waiting for him to coolly hiss "Two men on the ship?
Obviously I must have been misinformed."
>>The two cadets of Nova Squadron besides Wes and Locarno (Hajar and Sito) were
>fine--nothing seemed particularly wonderful, but they didn't need to do much.
>
I thought they were kind of useless, especially Sito. These are supposed to
be the crackerjack pilots of the academy. I'd expect a bit more self-confidence
even in the face of major disciplinary action. Instead I kept waiting for
Sito to start crying. Hardly a match for that Bejoran firebrand, Ensign Ro.
>Then, there's Nick Locarno. I thought he went slightly overboard in his final
>scene with Wes, but only slightly. Apart from that, he definitely managed to
>give off the air of, as Boothby put it, "coach, surrogate father, and best
>friend all in one" to the rest of Nova Squadron. He really felt like a born
>leader--and as I'm sure others noticed, he seemed rather a Kirk-figure in
>many ways (right down to the way he walked at times). His arguments started
>to ring false for me in his final scene with Wes, which wasn't so good--but
>the revelation at the end that he truly meant every one of them, to the point
>of taking the fall himself, lends a bit of poignancy to the whole thing.
>Very, very nice.
I thought the guy sucked eggs (oops, does Atsushi have that phrase copyrighted?).
The little ceramic ducks holding paper on our refrigerator have more magnetism.
I think the casting director blew it. Or the actor blew it. Or the director
blew it. The credibility of the whole scenario hinged on this guy being the
charismatic leader who could make friends and influence people like Dale
Carnegie. Instead, IMHO, he came across as a self-centered wimp. I didn't
buy him for a minute.
(ending phaser blast)
>
>And finally, we have Wes. Written to perfection, for possibly the first
>time. And performed to perfection, for possibly the first time. I don't
>know precisely what I can say here. The story was written around three
>people: Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and Picard). He had to
>choose and he did; and he chose well.
>
I agree with you here, Tim. This was a different Wesley. Not the innocent,
smarty-pants wunderkind anymore. (Actually, having seen Wil Wheaton at a
convention recently, this Wes is much more like Wil himself seems to be.)
>>The best example of this, and in fact the best character interplay I've seen
>in months, had to be the Picard/Wes scene in his ready room. I could not
>stop watching--literally.
>
I agree strongly with you on this one. This is the best I've seen Picard in
ages, and to me is one of the best scenes ST:TNG has done in a long time.
I liked this episode a lot. This and 'Cause and Effect' are for me two of
TNG's best ever (hopefully we haven't all unconsciously lowered our standards
because of some of the drek trek offered this season.)
Richard
LORNA_PAYNE
> In article <1992Apr7.0...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu
> (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>Now, some short takes:
>>
>>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
>
> There are probably several Academy campuses. The logo for the campus seen
> in First Duty was for San Francisco. The triangular logo, with the rising or
> setting sun under the Golden Gate bridge, reads "Starfleet Academy - San
> Francisco - Sol Sector" which implies that there are other campuses in other
Maybe even--daa-daa-da-daaaa--space stations? So Franz Joseph isn't completely
retconned/invalidated. Just outdated. Besides, in the 24th century, with
subspace radio and all, why should the Adacamy be one centralized location?
Lots of universities today have several locations, and students move back and
forth between them. So in two years, maybe Wes will spend a semester (or the
equivalent) on Andor. He'll certainly spend some time on board a ship--US Navy
cadets do that now.
---------------------------------------------------------
Lorna Payne
Certified Math Geek and Grammarian
---------------------------------------------------------
You are not Morg. You are not Eymorg. What are you?
---------------------------------------------------------
Brian Samuel Bevins
Yes! The maneuver they showed in the video simulation was a Yeager
Loop. This really exists.
--
-Brian Bevins
bs...@virginia.edu
bev...@cebaf.gov
Atsushi Kanamori
>Spoilers ahead for 'The First Duty'. Watch your sensors for a proximity
>alert.
>
>I liked this episode a lot. This and 'Cause and Effect' are for me two of
>TNG's best ever
I wouldn't go *that* far. TFD may eventually make it into my top 20 (if it
isn't there already.) C&E will most certainly not -- I'm not much enamored
by that episode.
>(hopefully we haven't all unconsciously lowered our standards
>because of some of the drek trek offered this season.)
I haven't lowered my standards, just my ratings. :-)
I think Season 5-1992 is looking better than season 5-1991. The second
half has had at least a few episodes that I enjoyed sitting among a large
number of stinkers -- IMO, a preferable situation to the first half
of the season which struck me as uniformly mediocre.
. . . . .
: : : :. : : :....: : . ::.: . ..: : .. : : .
::::::::::.: :::::::.:::::::::::.:::::: :?.:::::..::::.:.:
------------ -------------------------- --------------------------
TNG Lifelines: From "Yesterday's Enterprise" To "Cause & Effect" --
"Captain, we are getting unusual readings 20,000 km off the
starboard bow." -- Worf, Worf, Worf and Ensign Ro.
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Apr7.0...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
"The First Duty" spoilers:
>>My, that was surprisingly good!
>Not surprisingly, I was hoping it would be this good! (-:
I was hoping for it as well, but the preview had me expecting less.
[Bev]
>(Along
>>similar lines, her reaction to hearing of Wes's accident seemed very right as
>>well; knowing it rationally, but falling apart deep down anyway.)
>I don't know about that scene. I could see what she was *trying* to do, but
>I think she did too much of it. I was getting apathy from her when that was
>clearly not intended.
I didn't get apathy; I got shock. She walled herself away, 'cos she had
no idea what to do otherwise.
>>(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
>>Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
>>contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
>>not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
>>within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise.
>I doubt this, Picard would have forgiven him, regardless of what he said.
Had he continued to stonewall and *let* an innocent boy be blamed? No way.
I rather suspect Picard would have gone to Brand just after the hearing.
Even if he'd let Wes actually get away with it, he'd NEVER have spoken to
him again.
>He
>would have been dissapointed in him to be sure, but he knows what kind of
>character he has, and one mistake (even a big moral one such as he would have
>been making) is not enough to make Picard abandon Wesley.
Except this isn't one mistake; this is three. Mistake one was being suckered
into the damned stunt in the first place, and mistake two was trying to cover
it up. Continuing to stonewall when the game's up is a very heavy third
strike.
>>Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
>>as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
>>an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
>>actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
>>and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
>>choice.
>I thought he did a decent job for the tact that he chose. I don't assume that
>all Vulcans are going to be unemotional.
Nor do I. I do assume, however, they they will all *try* to be logical and
unemotional; and this one was nowhere near either.
>>And finally, we have Wes. Written to perfection, for possibly the first
>>time. And performed to perfection, for possibly the first time. I don't
>>know precisely what I can say here.
>I don't know, I thought his character was handled perfectly in "The Dauphin"
>and "Final Mission."
Nah, not quite. Close in some cases (particularly FM), but all of them had
little things here and there. This was a nice *realistic* treatment; the
others were more "perfect given Wes's somewhat unreal character".
>And Wheaton has always done a nice job with the material
>he's been given.
Always? Hmm. Can we settle on "often"? :-)
>>--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
>>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
>Well, the military acedemies now play against normal colleges nowadays, I
>don't see why this would change.
But what kind of "normal colleges" are we talking about in that century?
That's what I'm curious about.
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
R.I.P. Isaac Asimov, 1920-1992. You will be missed.
Timothy W. Lynch
Yeah, you're probably right. The thought never even occurred to me, but
I've had at least 3-4 responses besides yours. Whoops; my fault. (No
offense, Chuck, if you're reading. ;-) )
Tim Lynch
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article 13...@cco.caltech.edu, tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
>>as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
>>an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
>>actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
>>and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
>>choice.
>I have to agree with Tim here. I thought the Vulcan guy went to the Tomaluk
>school of acting. I kept waiting for him to coolly hiss "Two men on the ship?
>Obviously I must have been misinformed."
Hey, I *like* Tomalak! It's this guy I couldn't stand. :-)
>>The two cadets of Nova Squadron besides Wes and Locarno (Hajar and Sito) were
>>fine--nothing seemed particularly wonderful, but they didn't need to do much.
>>
>I thought they were kind of useless, especially Sito. These are supposed to
>be the crackerjack pilots of the academy. I'd expect a bit more self-
>confidence even in the face of major disciplinary action.
I've known a lot of hotshots that aren't that self-confident--and
especially given that they're in the middle of a coverup, being a bit
unsettled seems very plausible.
>>Then, there's Nick Locarno. I thought he went slightly overboard in his final
>>scene with Wes, but only slightly. Apart from that, he definitely managed to
>>give off the air of, as Boothby put it, "coach, surrogate father, and best
>>friend all in one" to the rest of Nova Squadron. He really felt like a born
>>leader--and as I'm sure others noticed, he seemed rather a Kirk-figure in
>>many ways (right down to the way he walked at times). His arguments started
>>to ring false for me in his final scene with Wes, which wasn't so good--but
>>the revelation at the end that he truly meant every one of them, to the point
>>of taking the fall himself, lends a bit of poignancy to the whole thing.
>>Very, very nice.
>I thought the guy sucked eggs (oops, does Atsushi have that phrase
>copyrighted?). The little ceramic ducks holding paper on our refrigerator
>have more magnetism.
I don't buy that. I've backed off a little bit from the above, but I really
did see lots of "somethings" in there that could draw people. Not me, but I'm
not much for personality cults most of the time.
Tim Lynch
tan...@inland.com
consequently have missed a lot of material! Would someone out there mail
me Mr. Lynch's synopsis and review of "First Duty?" Thanks in advance!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
John Tanski >< "Work. Worry. Consume. Die.
ISFPC - R & D Dept >< It's a wonderful life."
(tan...@inland.com) >< Lippy (Bill Griffith)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Jose Gonzalez
>wom...@eng.umd.edu (Jose Gonzalez) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr7.0...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>
>"The First Duty" spoilers:
>
>
>
>>(Along
>>>similar lines, her reaction to hearing of Wes's accident seemed very right as
>>>well; knowing it rationally, but falling apart deep down anyway.)
>
>>I don't know about that scene. I could see what she was *trying* to do, but
>>I think she did too much of it. I was getting apathy from her when that was
>>clearly not intended.
>
>I didn't get apathy; I got shock. She walled herself away, 'cos she had
>no idea what to do otherwise.
Didn't work for me. She was trying to equate non-acting with shock, and she
failed, methinks.
>
>>>(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
>>>Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
>>>contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
>>>not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
>>>within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise.
>
>>I doubt this, Picard would have forgiven him, regardless of what he said.
>
>Had he continued to stonewall and *let* an innocent boy be blamed? No way.
Well, there was evidence to suggest that it was Josh's fault, and seeing as
how he's dead, I don't think Wes has any more loyalty to him. The crime there
would be in letting his *family* go on believing that Josh was totally at
fault.
>I rather suspect Picard would have gone to Brand just after the hearing.
>Even if he'd let Wes actually get away with it, he'd NEVER have spoken to
>him again.
Oh, really? He may not have spoken to him for a while, but it's very
difficult to stay mad at someone indefinately. It's much easier to forgive,
and eventually, he would forgive him. Wes acted out of fear. I've had
friends who have done things that I find absolutely despicable, yet more often
than not, they do it because they're scared. Abandoning them for their
actions doesn't do either of us any good.
>
>>>Most of the guest cast were good. My main objection here is to Richard Fancy
>>>as Satelk--he made a truly miserable, and *dull*, Vulcan. I think this was
>>>an acting (or maybe directing?) problem more than one of the writing; his
>>>actual questions seemed to be fairly short and to the point. His demeanor
>>>and tone of voice, however, screamed anything BUT Vulcan to me. Not a good
>>>choice.
>
>>I thought he did a decent job for the tact that he chose. I don't assume that
>>all Vulcans are going to be unemotional.
>
>Nor do I. I do assume, however, they they will all *try* to be logical and
>unemotional;
Why? You assume they all *want* to act that way. Maybe hanging around humans
has made him change his mind in regard to that silly custom, anyway.
>>And Wheaton has always done a nice job with the material
>>he's been given.
>
>Always? Hmm. Can we settle on "often"? :-)
Definately. I just caught "The Child" for the first time since it originally
aired. Check out the stupiest, goofiest grin on Wes' face at the end of
that! Sheesh!
>
>>>--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
>>>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>>>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
>
>>Well, the military acedemies now play against normal colleges nowadays, I
>>don't see why this would change.
>
>But what kind of "normal colleges" are we talking about in that century?
>That's what I'm curious about.
Why would they be any different than today's, just updated for the careers that
are now available.
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Apr9.0...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>"The First Duty" spoilers:
>>
>>>>(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
>>>>Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
>>>>contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
>>>>not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
>>>>within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise.
>>
>>>I doubt this, Picard would have forgiven him, regardless of what he said.
>>
>>Had he continued to stonewall and *let* an innocent boy be blamed? No way.
>Well, there was evidence to suggest that it was Josh's fault,
Whoa. Back up.
Just what evidence is that? There's evidence that he chose to take part in the
maneuver, but I recall no evidence that *his* screwup somehow caused the
crash. Nick asserted such, but he's hardly to be believed blindly.
>>I rather suspect Picard would have gone to Brand just after the hearing.
>>Even if he'd let Wes actually get away with it, he'd NEVER have spoken to
>>him again.
>Oh, really? He may not have spoken to him for a while, but it's very
>difficult to stay mad at someone indefinately. It's much easier to forgive,
>and eventually, he would forgive him.
Let me tell you a little story.
You recall my mistake about the author of "Violations"? He/she confessed to
me once the game was up, but could very easily have continued to develop
bizarre scenarios about how he/she was set up or being lied about. Had that
happened, the connection would have been cut. Severed. End of tale.
Maybe that makes me unforgiving; but betrayal does not sit lightly with me.
Nor, I suspect, does it with Picard.
[Satelk]
>>>I thought he did a decent job for the tact that he chose. I don't assume
>>>that all Vulcans are going to be unemotional.
>>
>>Nor do I. I do assume, however, they they will all *try* to be logical and
>>unemotional;
>Why? You assume they all *want* to act that way. Maybe hanging around humans
>has made him change his mind in regard to that silly custom, anyway.
Oh, please. Isn't this just a bit reaching for a bit part? If I see a Vulcan
without any explanation, I expect that Vulcan to behave in a manner similar to
the way we've seen Vulcans behave in the past. Fancy failed utterly. Come
on, Jose...
>>>>--I'm trying to figure out exactly what school "the game against Minsk"
>>>>referred to. Is there another campus for the Academy, or is this a
>>>>completely different *type* of school? Any ideas?
>>
>>>Well, the military acedemies now play against normal colleges nowadays, I
>>>don't see why this would change.
>>
>>But what kind of "normal colleges" are we talking about in that century?
>>That's what I'm curious about.
>Why would they be any different than today's, just updated for the careers
>that are now available.
They probably aren't. I was just startled, since they've never suggested
such a beastie before.
Tim Lynch
Jose Gonzalez
>wom...@eng.umd.edu (Jose Gonzalez) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr9.0...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>
>>>"The First Duty" spoilers:
>>>
>>>>>(Incidentally, Wes's choice could have been made much easier, and *wasn't*.
>>>>>Picard could well have pointed out that even if Picard *did* speak and was
>>>>>contradicted, Wes would be working under a cloud of suspicion for years if
>>>>>not decades after graduating, and he damn sure wouldn't be able to serve
>>>>>within a kiloparsec of the Enterprise.
>>>
>>>>I doubt this, Picard would have forgiven him, regardless of what he said.
>>>
>>>Had he continued to stonewall and *let* an innocent boy be blamed? No way.
>
>>Well, there was evidence to suggest that it was Josh's fault,
>
>Whoa. Back up.
>
>Just what evidence is that? There's evidence that he chose to take part in the
>maneuver, but I recall no evidence that *his* screwup somehow caused the
>crash. Nick asserted such, but he's hardly to be believed blindly.
Okay, putting anything Nick said aside, Cito and Jean reluctantly agreed that
Josh may have been scared and somehow messed up. And Wesley's "He wasn't
ready. We pushed him into it," suggests to me that, although Josh is not
to blame for the accident, the maneuver may have been beyond his abilities
and therefore performed incorrectly. This is by no means proof, but it's
enough to make it interesting.
>
>>>I rather suspect Picard would have gone to Brand just after the hearing.
>>>Even if he'd let Wes actually get away with it, he'd NEVER have spoken to
>>>him again.
>
>>Oh, really? He may not have spoken to him for a while, but it's very
>>difficult to stay mad at someone indefinately. It's much easier to forgive,
>>and eventually, he would forgive him.
>
>Let me tell you a little story.
>
>You recall my mistake about the author of "Violations"? He/she confessed to
>me once the game was up, but could very easily have continued to develop
>bizarre scenarios about how he/she was set up or being lied about. Had that
>happened, the connection would have been cut. Severed. End of tale.
>
>Maybe that makes me unforgiving; but betrayal does not sit lightly with me.
>Nor, I suspect, does it with Picard.
Just how good a friend was he? And would you have severed all relations to
your *son*, if he had done the same? Remember, that is the relationship they
have.
>[Satelk]
>
>>Why? You assume they all *want* to act that way. Maybe hanging around humans
>>has made him change his mind in regard to that silly custom, anyway.
>
>Oh, please. Isn't this just a bit reaching for a bit part? If I see a Vulcan
>without any explanation, I expect that Vulcan to behave in a manner similar to
>the way we've seen Vulcans behave in the past. Fancy failed utterly. Come
>on, Jose...
You buying? (-: Seriously, though, 'taint a big deal, I'm just being
difficult. (-:
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Apr10....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>>Well, there was evidence to suggest that it was Josh's fault,
>>
>>Whoa. Back up.
>>
>>Just what evidence is that? There's evidence that he chose to take part in
>>the maneuver, but I recall no evidence that *his* screwup somehow caused the
>>crash. Nick asserted such, but he's hardly to be believed blindly.
>Okay, putting anything Nick said aside, Cito and Jean reluctantly agreed that
>Josh may have been scared and somehow messed up.
And Nick pressured them into that statement rather vividly.
>And Wesley's "He wasn't
>ready. We pushed him into it," suggests to me that, although Josh is not
>to blame for the accident, the maneuver may have been beyond his abilities
>and therefore performed incorrectly.
That hardly means it was his *fault*. The fact that he ended up taking part
in the thing is, in the end, his fault, but it doesn't mean the actual event
of the crash is. (And I highly doubt any of that matters to Picard.)
>>>>I rather suspect Picard would have gone to Brand just after the hearing.
>>>>Even if he'd let Wes actually get away with it, he'd NEVER have spoken to
>>>>him again.
>>
>>>Oh, really? He may not have spoken to him for a while, but it's very
>>>difficult to stay mad at someone indefinately. It's much easier to forgive,
>>>and eventually, he would forgive him.
>>
>>Let me tell you a little story.
>>
>>You recall my mistake about the author of "Violations"? He/she confessed to
>>me once the game was up, but could very easily have continued to develop
>>bizarre scenarios about how he/she was set up or being lied about. Had that
>>happened, the connection would have been cut. Severed. End of tale.
>>
>>Maybe that makes me unforgiving; but betrayal does not sit lightly with me.
>>Nor, I suspect, does it with Picard.
>Just how good a friend was he?
I have two answers for this. The first is "good enough that I'm probably
getting a wedding invitation in the mail soon."
The second is that it's neither relevant to the discussion nor any of your
damned business, to be frank. If you're going to start claiming that people
only sever all ties when it's "shallow" friendships, then we're not going to
remain civil long.
>And would you have severed all relations to
>your *son*, if he had done the same? Remember, that is the relationship they
>have.
No...I remember that that's the relationship YOU claim they have. Saying
someone is *like* a son is far from saying "this is my son".
Tim Lynch
Atsushi Kanamori
>>>Let me tell you a little story.
>>>
>>>You recall my mistake about the author of "Violations"? He/she confessed to
>>>me once the game was up, but could very easily have continued to develop
>>>bizarre scenarios about how he/she was set up or being lied about. Had that
>>>happened, the connection would have been cut. Severed. End of tale.
>>>
>>>Maybe that makes me unforgiving; but betrayal does not sit lightly with me.
>>>Nor, I suspect, does it with Picard.
>
>>Just how good a friend was he?
>
>I have two answers for this. The first is "good enough that I'm probably
>getting a wedding invitation in the mail soon."
>
>The second is that it's neither relevant to the discussion nor any of your
>damned business, to be frank. If you're going to start claiming that people
>only sever all ties when it's "shallow" friendships, then we're not going to
>remain civil long.
Chill *out*, man. I thought it was a highly relevant question. And even
if it's something you want to keep private, it's hardly a question that
merited such a caustic response. People can have different ideas on
forgiveness; that's no reason to stop being civil.
Sometimes, I honestly wonder why people call your style "non-confrontational."
>>And would you have severed all relations to
>>your *son*, if he had done the same? Remember, that is the relationship they
>>have.
>
>No...I remember that that's the relationship YOU claim they have. Saying
>someone is *like* a son is far from saying "this is my son".
Uh, you said yourself "Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and
Picard)." I think "*like* a son" and "is a son" are, for all practical
purposes, equivalent. Unless you're thinking of some fundamental difference
other than the biological one, the analogy sounds quite apt.
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Apr10.2...@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>>>Let me tell you a little story.
[story deleted; we've seen it by now]
>>>Just how good a friend was he?
>>
>>I have two answers for this. The first is "good enough that I'm probably
>>getting a wedding invitation in the mail soon."
>>
>>The second is that it's neither relevant to the discussion nor any of your
>>damned business, to be frank. If you're going to start claiming that people
>>only sever all ties when it's "shallow" friendships, then we're not going to
>>remain civil long.
>Chill *out*, man.
Your pardon. I have had a *very* bad couple of days, and suddenly seeing the
(to me) implied "well, if you were going to do it that quickly, he/she couldn't
have been much of a REAL friend" was not exactly the best of statements.
Sorry, Jose. It's not your fault.
>>>And would you have severed all relations to
>>>your *son*, if he had done the same? Remember, that is the relationship
>>>they have.
>>
>>No...I remember that that's the relationship YOU claim they have. Saying
>>someone is *like* a son is far from saying "this is my son".
>Uh, you said yourself "Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and
>Picard)." I think "*like* a son" and "is a son" are, for all practical
>purposes, equivalent. Unless you're thinking of some fundamental difference
>other than the biological one, the analogy sounds quite apt.
The difference in this case would probably have to be length of time in which
I'd known the "son" in question. Picard's known Wes for about four years,
Locarno for a year and change. And while extremely strong bonds can form
in those times (esp. the former), I'd be hard-pressed to compare them with
someone I *literally* helped raise to Wes's age.
The analogy's probably stronger than I dismissed it as, and that's my fault.
But it doesn't strike me as all that apt.
To answer your question, Jose, I don't know. Probably not; but I don't
believe the analogy is apt.
Tim Lynch
Atsushi Kanamori
>kana...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Atsushi Kanamori) writes:
>
>>>>And would you have severed all relations to
>>>>your *son*, if he had done the same? Remember, that is the relationship
>>>>they have.
>>>
>>>No...I remember that that's the relationship YOU claim they have. Saying
>>>someone is *like* a son is far from saying "this is my son".
>
>>Uh, you said yourself "Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and
>>Picard)." I think "*like* a son" and "is a son" are, for all practical
>>purposes, equivalent. Unless you're thinking of some fundamental difference
>>other than the biological one, the analogy sounds quite apt.
>
>The difference in this case would probably have to be length of time in which
>I'd known the "son" in question. Picard's known Wes for about four years,
>Locarno for a year and change. And while extremely strong bonds can form
>in those times (esp. the former), I'd be hard-pressed to compare them with
>someone I *literally* helped raise to Wes's age.
Okay. That I can buy.
Personally, I think 4 years is long enough to make the bonds work -- at least
well enough to convince me as a viewer that Picard *could* eventually
forgive a betrayal like that (at least if Wes pulled some of the weight
in his subsequent actions.) Hell, the fact that the P/W confrontation
worked as well as it did for me (i.e. one hasn't yet *seen* much of the P/W
relationship) has to mean something.) The exact line will depend on
the person's own values and priorities, so it's probably an unresolvable
dispute.
>To answer your question, Jose, I don't know. Probably not; but I don't
>believe the analogy is apt.
That's pretty much it. I think the analogy is apt, but I don't really know.
Timothy W. Lynch
>In article <1992Apr10....@cco.caltech.edu> tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>The difference in this case would probably have to be length of time in which
>>I'd known the "son" in question. Picard's known Wes for about four years,
>>Locarno for a year and change. And while extremely strong bonds can form
>>in those times (esp. the former), I'd be hard-pressed to compare them with
>>someone I *literally* helped raise to Wes's age.
>Okay. That I can buy.
>Personally, I think 4 years is long enough to make the bonds work -- at least
>well enough to convince me as a viewer that Picard *could* eventually
>forgive a betrayal like that (at least if Wes pulled some of the weight
>in his subsequent actions.)
Oh, that's fine. I think it's possible that Wes could somehow earn his
way back into Picard's good graces; but that doesn't seem to alter for me the
claim that Picard could have stacked the deck a lot more to make Wes choose
the way he did by bringing all these little possibilities up. (That is what
originally started this, right? :-) )
Tim Lynch
Kyle Jones
> Okay, putting anything Nick said aside, Cito and Jean reluctantly agreed that
> Josh may have been scared and somehow messed up.
tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
> And Nick pressured them into that statement rather vividly.
What pressure? Wesley had already stuck his neck out. If Cito
or Jean would have sided with him, that's half of the group. The
alien (Cito?) looked like she was scared of everyone, so I can't
say much for her, but Jean at least looked like she had some
backbone.
Timothy W. Lynch
[Thanks for keeping the attributions intact, Kyle. :-) ]
>>Okay, putting anything Nick said aside, Cito and Jean reluctantly agreed that
>>Josh may have been scared and somehow messed up.
>tly...@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>And Nick pressured them into that statement rather vividly.
>What pressure?
Pressure by force of personality. Look at the scene, and look at the stares
Nick has to give them before they break down and agree.
And remember, there are good reasons *beyond* this for everyone to _wonder_
if Josh panicked. Of course they're going to wonder, even if he was the
best pilot they'd ever seen. He's *dead*, and it's partly their fault; they're
going to unconsciously jump on whatever they can, distancing themselves from
the realization that it could well have been them, too.
Sure, it could have been pilot error. Josh could also have had a sudden
heart attack or coronary and fallen unconscious. (Hey, it's a reason he
couldn't beam out, right?) We *don't know*, and to argue that "oh, well, it
was obviously Josh's fault and there's no reason for anyone else to suffer
for it" is to me an unconscionable line of "reasoning".
>Wesley had already stuck his neck out.
And you've been arguing that Nick should have chopped it off, or at least that
Wes shouldn't have done so. If you're arguing that on no information, imagine
the pressures Nick was unconsciously bringing to bear on the others who *did*
have such information.
Tim Lynch