Ending their existence requires agency on the part of Tuvix, something he did not possess prior to his own existence, for obvious reasons. He cannot act in the universe without having existed, he can't be attributed with action. Saying he did something isn't applicable to this situation as he as an entity was not a factor in their death. Their death was a factor in his formation as an entity.
Were this is a normal death, I'd agree. I'm not talking about the event which caused Tuvix' existence. He had no role in that. However, every second after that his existence kept them from living again.
But they were already dead.
Not really. Were they truly dead Janeway had no way to bring them back to life.
They could easily have added in something to explain why Tuvix had to go away, some kind of medicotechnobabble or something.
Agreed. Instead they created a morality tale for Trek fans to debate on until the end of time.
Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
I finally stumbled across the Star Trek thread, finally.
I'm not sure if this has been brought up before in 86 pages, but I always like to ask other Trek fans about this... I (in all seriousness) find that I've referred to Trek (especially TNG) as my moral compass. I don't think I've ever really disagreed with the resolution of any ethical dilemma presented in that series. This is my biggest reason for loving the franchise; it gives me hope that one day human beings will "evolve" to a point where reason, not dogma, will prevail. And compassion will not be something only taught through religious teachings, but a necessary part of any well-lubricated, functioning society.
So I guess what I want to know is... does anyone else feel that ST inspires them in this way, as opposed to simply enjoying it for the sake of great storytelling?
Subconsciously it may have influenced me. TNG and TOS, in particular.
It didn't effect me like it did you, though. I'm a bit of a pessimist about humans surviving the next few hundred years with global warming occurring and humanity sitting in our asses doing nothing about it. For all out accomplishments we've let our worst impulses take over when we need them most, even today, in matters that effect us all like politics & business. This is kinda why DS9 is still my favorite Trek series. It doesn't pretend those problems don't exist and has characters willing to confront them head on.
I do love that about DS9: it uses alien conflicts to tackle issues of racism, genocide, and war. I think the ways in which the show handled the portrayal of mankind & ethics differently can be explained by Gene Roddenberry's passing away. He was alive at its conception, but was never directly involved.
Agreed.
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
Been years since I've watched the show (thank god for Netflix and Amazon) but that sounds like cool. Very impressive that they'd take out all the Trek elements for a strictly drama episode.
What you two are discussing can be said of every Star Trek series, not just DS9. Tell me of a ST series that pretends problems don't exist or that portrays main characters unwilling to confront them(at least for the most part). Without hyperbole.
I wouldn't describe the other series in that way. I think the difference is that there are many, many more "win-win" endings in, for instance, TNG.
In DS9 situations arise more often where one good must be sacrificed for another, if greater, good. This usually results in more ambiguous consequences, which is probably easier to relate to for most of us living in the 21st century.
More importantly, the characters are not as easily classified into categories of good and bad. While the crew of the Enterprise experience feelings of selfishness, hate, and anger at times, they seem to have a very strong sense of right and wrong. We always know they are aligned with each other, and with Starfleet... (unless Starfleet command has been taken over by a parasitic alien race or somesuch thing) whereas in DS9, we often wonder who's side everyone is on. Especially with Quark, Garak, and Kira. Trust and deception seem to be major continuing themes.
There were plenty of episodes dealing with disagreements between federation people and the enterprise characters in TNG. It simply wasn't as pronounced, because TNG wasn't as much a melodrama like DS9, and it was episodic, leaving it without as much time to devote to exploring these issues over multiple episodes.
What you're saying about the enterprise crew could be said of the DS9 crew. Using the non humans here isn't a fair comparison because of course they'll be different than the humans. The enterprise only had one non human crew member, and he was the one who did bring moral diversity to various situations. DS9 simply had more.
Can you describe some of these win win situations? I'm sure TNG had some, but so did DS9. To characterize the series as a whole in complete opposition to DS9 isn't very accurate. It's a different format which really just didn't allow for focus on specific themes.
Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
The big example in my mind is that they created Michael. The alternative is killing the Wraith outright, but biological/genetic warfare crosses a line that the franchise (at least, the SGC) had not crossed before (The Goa'uld did it, of course, but they are black hat bad guys). They also "inflict" the Replicators on the Pegasus galaxy in order to fend off the Wraith, arguably creating a worse problem than the Wraith.
Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
The big example in my mind is that they created Michael. The alternative is killing the Wraith outright, but biological/genetic warfare crosses a line that the franchise (at least, the SGC) had not crossed before (The Goa'uld did it, of course, but they are black hat bad guys). They also "inflict" the Replicators on the Pegasus galaxy in order to fend off the Wraith, arguably creating a worse problem than the Wraith.
Those are good examples. I agree that both were stupid decisions, even if I can understand why the characters did it.
I finally stumbled across the Star Trek thread, finally.
I'm not sure if this has been brought up before in 86 pages, but I always like to ask other Trek fans about this... I (in all seriousness) find that I've referred to Trek (especially TNG) as my moral compass. I don't think I've ever really disagreed with the resolution of any ethical dilemma presented in that series. This is my biggest reason for loving the franchise; it gives me hope that one day human beings will "evolve" to a point where reason, not dogma, will prevail. And compassion will not be something only taught through religious teachings, but a necessary part of any well-lubricated, functioning society.
So I guess what I want to know is... does anyone else feel that ST inspires them in this way, as opposed to simply enjoying it for the sake of great storytelling?
Subconsciously it may have influenced me. TNG and TOS, in particular.
It didn't effect me like it did you, though. I'm a bit of a pessimist about humans surviving the next few hundred years with global warming occurring and humanity sitting in our asses doing nothing about it. For all out accomplishments we've let our worst impulses take over when we need them most, even today, in matters that effect us all like politics & business. This is kinda why DS9 is still my favorite Trek series. It doesn't pretend those problems don't exist and has characters willing to confront them head on.
I do love that about DS9: it uses alien conflicts to tackle issues of racism, genocide, and war. I think the ways in which the show handled the portrayal of mankind & ethics differently can be explained by Gene Roddenberry's passing away. He was alive at its conception, but was never directly involved.
Agreed.
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
Been years since I've watched the show (thank god for Netflix and Amazon) but that sounds like cool. Very impressive that they'd take out all the Trek elements for a strictly drama episode.
What you two are discussing can be said of every Star Trek series, not just DS9. Tell me of a ST series that pretends problems don't exist or that portrays main characters unwilling to confront them(at least for the most part). Without hyperbole.
I wouldn't describe the other series in that way. I think the difference is that there are many, many more "win-win" endings in, for instance, TNG.
In DS9 situations arise more often where one good must be sacrificed for another, if greater, good. This usually results in more ambiguous consequences, which is probably easier to relate to for most of us living in the 21st century.
More importantly, the characters are not as easily classified into categories of good and bad. While the crew of the Enterprise experience feelings of selfishness, hate, and anger at times, they seem to have a very strong sense of right and wrong. We always know they are aligned with each other, and with Starfleet... (unless Starfleet command has been taken over by a parasitic alien race or somesuch thing) whereas in DS9, we often wonder who's side everyone is on. Especially with Quark, Garak, and Kira. Trust and deception seem to be major continuing themes.
There were plenty of episodes dealing with disagreements between federation people and the enterprise characters in TNG. It simply wasn't as pronounced, because TNG wasn't as melodrama a much like DS9, and it was episodic, leaving it without as much time to devote to exploring these issues over multiple episodes.
What you're saying about the enterprise crew could be said of the DS9 crew. Using the non humans here isn't a fair comparison because of course they'll be different than the humans. The enterprise only had one non human crew member, and he was the one who did bring moral diversity to various situations. DS9 simply had more.
Can you describe some of these win win situations? I'm sure TNG had some, but so did DS9. To characterize the series as a whole in complete opposition to DS9 isn't very accurate. It's a different format which really just didn't allow for focus on specific themes.
I'm not characterizing it as being in "complete opposition to DS9". In fact I would say we probably agree more than we disagree. I think ambiguous morality is something that runs through every ST series. I simply pointed out that I enjoy the contrast that was present, even if it was small in comparison to the similarities they shared.
You know what my biggest problem was with Tuvix? I don't care that Janeway murdered him to get Tuvok and dumbass back, I care that there was never any fallout. Same with O'Brien and space prision and Picard with the Borg. These are events that should have had much more of an effect on their psyche than they did (outside of the specific episodes they happened in).
I think Picard and the borg was explored, in a manner of sorts. It was just more subtle than tense drama. Picard undergoes a complete character arc throughout the series. He starts out as the arrogant but intellectual and inquisitive captain. This is around the first few seasons, he'll often solve dilemmas rather handily and act somewhat patronizing(though not overtly so) to those who transgress upon his code of ethics. His experiences throughout season three begin to give him new insight into alien cultures(who watches the watchers, and others) and he becomes a bit more tempered in his approach and understanding. Then, the borg mess with him. after this he gains more humility, and a desire for greater understanding with less lecturing. He undergoes further trials at the hands of the cardassians and comes out stronger because of his experience with the borg helping to add resilience. Some of his decisions come to bite back, such as with Hugh and the murderous drones that result from his decisions in that instance. All the while he has encounters with Q who acts as somewhat of a spiritual guide. He also gains further enlightenment from experiences such as in 'The Inner Light'. It all builds up to him gaining a deeper understanding and insight into non linear time.
I mean, just because there weren't a bunch of 'now picard directly deals with his borg experience' scenes beyond the family episode, doesn't mean he wasn't dealing with various aspects and themes surrounding it all.
Someday, I'll create a flowchart showing the "Circle of Life: Star Trek on PA Forums". It will have the following recurring posts:
* Argument about DS9 vs TNG
* Sisko punches Q = AWESOME
* I just watched The Visitor and I cried
* OMG The Drumhead/The Inner Light
* There are FOUR lights meme
* Season 8 Twitter Feed
* Star Trek the Porno, related to:
** Holodeck spooge mopping (Space is one big orgy)
* Tuvix argument
* LOL Holodeck episodes
* Wesley is terrible, Nog is great
* Random YouTube clip of Patrick Stewert
* SFDebris review link: I agree
I finally stumbled across the Star Trek thread, finally.
I'm not sure if this has been brought up before in 86 pages, but I always like to ask other Trek fans about this... I (in all seriousness) find that I've referred to Trek (especially TNG) as my moral compass. I don't think I've ever really disagreed with the resolution of any ethical dilemma presented in that series. This is my biggest reason for loving the franchise; it gives me hope that one day human beings will "evolve" to a point where reason, not dogma, will prevail. And compassion will not be something only taught through religious teachings, but a necessary part of any well-lubricated, functioning society.
So I guess what I want to know is... does anyone else feel that ST inspires them in this way, as opposed to simply enjoying it for the sake of great storytelling?
Subconsciously it may have influenced me. TNG and TOS, in particular.
It didn't effect me like it did you, though. I'm a bit of a pessimist about humans surviving the next few hundred years with global warming occurring and humanity sitting in our asses doing nothing about it. For all out accomplishments we've let our worst impulses take over when we need them most, even today, in matters that effect us all like politics & business. This is kinda why DS9 is still my favorite Trek series. It doesn't pretend those problems don't exist and has characters willing to confront them head on.
I do love that about DS9: it uses alien conflicts to tackle issues of racism, genocide, and war. I think the ways in which the show handled the portrayal of mankind & ethics differently can be explained by Gene Roddenberry's passing away. He was alive at its conception, but was never directly involved.
Agreed.
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
Been years since I've watched the show (thank god for Netflix and Amazon) but that sounds like cool. Very impressive that they'd take out all the Trek elements for a strictly drama episode.
What you two are discussing can be said of every Star Trek series, not just DS9. Tell me of a ST series that pretends problems don't exist or that portrays main characters unwilling to confront them(at least for the most part). Without hyperbole.
I wouldn't describe the other series in that way. I think the difference is that there are many, many more "win-win" endings in, for instance, TNG.
In DS9 situations arise more often where one good must be sacrificed for another, if greater, good. This usually results in more ambiguous consequences, which is probably easier to relate to for most of us living in the 21st century.
More importantly, the characters are not as easily classified into categories of good and bad. While the crew of the Enterprise experience feelings of selfishness, hate, and anger at times, they seem to have a very strong sense of right and wrong. We always know they are aligned with each other, and with Starfleet... (unless Starfleet command has been taken over by a parasitic alien race or somesuch thing) whereas in DS9, we often wonder who's side everyone is on. Especially with Quark, Garak, and Kira. Trust and deception seem to be major continuing themes.
There were plenty of episodes dealing with disagreements between federation people and the enterprise characters in TNG. It simply wasn't as pronounced, because TNG wasn't as melodrama a much like DS9, and it was episodic, leaving it without as much time to devote to exploring these issues over multiple episodes.
What you're saying about the enterprise crew could be said of the DS9 crew. Using the non humans here isn't a fair comparison because of course they'll be different than the humans. The enterprise only had one non human crew member, and he was the one who did bring moral diversity to various situations. DS9 simply had more.
Can you describe some of these win win situations? I'm sure TNG had some, but so did DS9. To characterize the series as a whole in complete opposition to DS9 isn't very accurate. It's a different format which really just didn't allow for focus on specific themes.
TNG had more than one human on the Enterprise. Picard, Riker, Wesley, Dr. Crusher, Dr. Pulaski, Barclay, the O'Brien's, LaForge, Tasha Yar and then there's the humans that they interacted with briefly or re-occurring during the series.
TNG not being a melodrama or a serial like DS9 is a flaw in the format, that's why it's a fair game criticism. They imposed those limits on themselves and sure enough it bit them on the ass. Thankfully DS9 learnt from those mistakes, which is why it has superior storytelling.
Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
The big example in my mind is that they created Michael. The alternative is killing the Wraith outright, but biological/genetic warfare crosses a line that the franchise (at least, the SGC) had not crossed before (The Goa'uld did it, of course, but they are black hat bad guys). They also "inflict" the Replicators on the Pegasus galaxy in order to fend off the Wraith, arguably creating a worse problem than the Wraith.
Those are good examples. I agree that both were stupid decisions, even if I can understand why the characters did it.
Oddly enough, even though Stargate: Atlantis is mostly a civilian team, their decisions that flaunt a typical moral compass are easier to swallow, given that they are a military organization who are fighting a losing war against The Wraith, a mistake triggered in the first episode that they are continually trying to fix throughout the show. It's easier to accept "you do bad things when you're at war", somehow, at least for me. But I digress (probably best left to another Star-franchise thread *grin*).
I'm not characterizing it as being in "complete opposition to DS9". In fact I would say we probably agree more than we disagree. I think ambiguous morality is something that runs through every ST series. I simply pointed out that I enjoy the contrast that was present, even if it was small in comparison to the similarities they shared.
yes, I perhaps I did make an unfair characterization of your characterization. I mean, I can see where DS9 did display these aspects more prominently, but I just don't think it's because any of the writers on the others series didn't want to confront them or anything like that. More that DS9 used a setting and format that enable this thematic prominence.
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
The Visitor. If you haven't seen it, go and see it now.
Emissary
Duet
In The Hands of the Prophets
The Wire
Explorers
The Visitor
Trials and Tribble-ations
Rocks and Shoals
Waltz
The Magnificent Ferengi (Depends on your opinions of the Ferengi)
In The Pale Moonlight
Far Beyond The Stars
The Siege of AR-558/It's Only a Paper Moon
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
The Visitor. If you haven't seen it, go and see it now.
Yeah, thats another really good one.
Oceanic's list is filled with good episodes, although I cant remember whether I liked Rocks and Shoals (I kinda think I didnt).
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
The Visitor. If you haven't seen it, go and see it now.
Yeah, thats another really good one.
Oceanic's list is filled with good episodes, although I cant remember whether I liked Rocks and Shoals (I kinda think I didnt).
Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
The big example in my mind is that they created Michael. The alternative is killing the Wraith outright, but biological/genetic warfare crosses a line that the franchise (at least, the SGC) had not crossed before (The Goa'uld did it, of course, but they are black hat bad guys). They also "inflict" the Replicators on the Pegasus galaxy in order to fend off the Wraith, arguably creating a worse problem than the Wraith.
Those are good examples. I agree that both were stupid decisions, even if I can understand why the characters did it.
Oddly enough, even though Stargate: Atlantis is mostly a civilian team, their decisions that flaunt a typical moral compass are easier to swallow, given that they are a military organization who are fighting a losing war against The Wraith, a mistake triggered in the first episode that they are continually trying to fix throughout the show. It's easier to accept "you do bad things when you're at war", somehow, at least for me. But I digress (probably best left to another Star-franchise thread *grin*).
I kinda always saw the radical SG:A decisions on the scale of the U.S. dropping nukes on Japan. Definitely a "Dear God what have we released" kind of deal, but the alternative at the time seemed much, much worse. Also, with sicking the Replicators on the Wraith, it was a bit of a spur of the moment, one shot or none deal, and going scorched Earth on the human populations probably wasn't on the top of their minds.
But the best part about all of this? SG:A addressed it in Season 5 when Shep's team was put on trial, and they only "won" the trial because they basically bribed/blackmailed one of the judges to swing his vote. The rest of the galaxy, and even they to a point, realized just how fucked up they had made things.
Which is way more than Janeway ever learned about the results of her actions.
Someday, I'll create a flowchart showing the "Circle of Life: Star Trek on PA Forums". It will have the following recurring posts:
* Argument about DS9 vs TNG
* Sisko punches Q = AWESOME
* I just watched The Visitor and I cried
* OMG The Drumhead/The Inner Light
* There are FOUR lights meme
* Season 8 Twitter Feed
* Star Trek the Porno, related to:
** Holodeck spooge mopping (Space is one big orgy)
* Tuvix argument
* LOL Holodeck episodes
* Wesley is terrible, Nog is great
* Random YouTube clip of Patrick Stewert
* SFDebris review link: I agree
Ending their existence requires agency on the part of Tuvix, something he did not possess prior to his own existence, for obvious reasons. He cannot act in the universe without having existed, he can't be attributed with action. Saying he did something isn't applicable to this situation as he as an entity was not a factor in their death. Their death was a factor in his formation as an entity.
Were this is a normal death, I'd agree. I'm not talking about the event which caused Tuvix' existence. He had no role in that. However, every second after that his existence kept them from living again.
This could be said of all sorts of things. Your existence may have prevented the existence of another offspring that your parents would have had had you not been born. Your living in North America means someone else isn't. The existence of human beings denies the possibility of the existence of a race of intelligent bird-people. Mutual exclusivity is a fact of the universe. That existence should be a crime because it denies the existence of other things is absurd, since then all existence would be in violation. That's how supervillains justify their attempts to remake the universe.
Just finished season three on my DS9 re-watch on Netflix. I forgot there were so many bottle shows.
It also hurts that, when y'know what's coming, you become "LETS GET THERE NOOOOOW".
Some really good stuff I forgot, though, and obviously Dukat and Garak steal every scene.
The one bottle episode where Sisko and Jake go on vacation and end up in the Cardassian system and the Cardassians celebrate and show they're not all bad was good, though. There were several attempts throughout the first three seasons that I forgot about that tried to show that power as more grey and not all bad.
Sigh.
***
Separately, wait, Jeri Ryan and Braga were a thing? What?!
XBL: Bizazedo
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
Someday, I'll create a flowchart showing the "Circle of Life: Star Trek on PA Forums". It will have the following recurring posts:
* Argument about DS9 vs TNG
* Sisko punches Q = AWESOME
* I just watched The Visitor and I cried
* OMG The Drumhead/The Inner Light
* There are FOUR lights meme
* Season 8 Twitter Feed
* Star Trek the Porno, related to:
** Holodeck spooge mopping (Space is one big orgy)
* Tuvix argument
* LOL Holodeck episodes
* Wesley is terrible, Nog is great
* Random YouTube clip of Patrick Stewert
* SFDebris review link: I agree
Among others.
You forgot redlettermedia.
OMG INNER LIGHT! Even better than The Visitor! (though just barely).
I hope someday the Subspace Restaurant earns its way onto that list.
Emissary
Duet
In The Hands of the Prophets
The Wire
Explorers
The Visitor
Trials and Tribble-ations
Rocks and Shoals
Waltz
The Magnificent Ferengi (Depends on your opinions of the Ferengi)
In The Pale Moonlight
Far Beyond The Stars
The Siege of AR-558/It's Only a Paper Moon
I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting
Basically the whole arc from "Call to Arms" at the end of Season 5 to the retaking of the station about five episodes into season six represents that show firing on all cylinders.
Ending their existence requires agency on the part of Tuvix, something he did not possess prior to his own existence, for obvious reasons. He cannot act in the universe without having existed, he can't be attributed with action. Saying he did something isn't applicable to this situation as he as an entity was not a factor in their death. Their death was a factor in his formation as an entity.
Were this is a normal death, I'd agree. I'm not talking about the event which caused Tuvix' existence. He had no role in that. However, every second after that his existence kept them from living again.
This could be said of all sorts of things. Your existence may have prevented the existence of another offspring that your parents would have had had you not been born. Your living in North America means someone else isn't.
That doesn't come close to Tuvix situation. His mere existence keeps two people effectively dead by being alive. They're technically not fully dead, either. By pressing a magic button they can come back good as new. The downside is Tuvix ceasing to exist, but what made him was being sent back to the living entities that those parts belonged to originally. By existing Tuvix was effectively taking away their lives. They had no choice in the matter, either.
The existence of human beings denies the possibility of the existence of a race of intelligent bird-people.
Now you're being silly.
Mutual exclusivity is a fact of the universe. That existence should be a crime because it denies the existence of other things is absurd, since then all existence would be in violation.
Except we're not talking about our universe, we're about Trek's which things like this can and do happen.
That's how supervillains justify their attempts to remake the universe.
Your response was worth it for this line alone. :^:
0
Options
L Ron HowardThe duckMinnesotaRegistered Userregular
One of my favorites from DS9 "Far Beyond the Stars" where the Prophets give Sisko a vision of living as a black science fiction writer in 1950s. It's really poignant.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
The Visitor. If you haven't seen it, go and see it now.
Yeah, thats another really good one.
Oceanic's list is filled with good episodes, although I cant remember whether I liked Rocks and Shoals (I kinda think I didnt).
It's the one with
"Evil must be opposed!" *Hangs herself*
I thought it was pretty potent.
Yeah, somehow I confused Explorers with Rocks and Shoals, even though I memory-alpha'd it, but I guess thats what happens when Im still fucking around on the internet at 4am.
Man, it's been forever since I saw the end of DS9. These last ten hours have a truly insane amount of awesome compacted into them, although there's way too much time being spent on the Winn/Dukat storyline.
Ending their existence requires agency on the part of Tuvix, something he did not possess prior to his own existence, for obvious reasons. He cannot act in the universe without having existed, he can't be attributed with action. Saying he did something isn't applicable to this situation as he as an entity was not a factor in their death. Their death was a factor in his formation as an entity.
Were this is a normal death, I'd agree. I'm not talking about the event which caused Tuvix' existence. He had no role in that. However, every second after that his existence kept them from living again.
But they were already dead.
They could easily have added in something to explain why Tuvix had to go away, some kind of medicotechnobabble or something. Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
That's what made that ending great.
Tuvix pleads for the crew to save him and they all turn away. Because deep down they want Tuvok and Neelix back. (Ok, maybe just Tuvok).
When it came down to it, to them it was a decision based in emotional attachment to their friends not a decision formed from some axiomatic ethical formulation.
It was Tuvix vs Tuvok/Neelix, one of them had to die forever and they picked the ones their old buddies.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Ending their existence requires agency on the part of Tuvix, something he did not possess prior to his own existence, for obvious reasons. He cannot act in the universe without having existed, he can't be attributed with action. Saying he did something isn't applicable to this situation as he as an entity was not a factor in their death. Their death was a factor in his formation as an entity.
Were this is a normal death, I'd agree. I'm not talking about the event which caused Tuvix' existence. He had no role in that. However, every second after that his existence kept them from living again.
But they were already dead.
They could easily have added in something to explain why Tuvix had to go away, some kind of medicotechnobabble or something. Instead they went with the Stargate Atlantis justification: It's okay cause it saves our main characters. I loved SGA, but those guys had some fucked up morals at times.
That's what made that ending great.
Tuvix pleads for the crew to save him and they all turn away. Because deep down they want Tuvok and Neelix back. (Ok, maybe just Tuvok).
When it came down to it, to them it was a decision based in emotional attachment to their friends not a decision formed from some axiomatic ethical formulation.
It was Tuvix vs Tuvok/Neelix, one of them had to die forever and they picked the ones their old buddies.
Posts
Not really. Were they truly dead Janeway had no way to bring them back to life.
Agreed. Instead they created a morality tale for Trek fans to debate on until the end of time.
Can't recall anything that stands out with SG:A. Do you have any examples?
There were plenty of episodes dealing with disagreements between federation people and the enterprise characters in TNG. It simply wasn't as pronounced, because TNG wasn't as much a melodrama like DS9, and it was episodic, leaving it without as much time to devote to exploring these issues over multiple episodes.
What you're saying about the enterprise crew could be said of the DS9 crew. Using the non humans here isn't a fair comparison because of course they'll be different than the humans. The enterprise only had one non human crew member, and he was the one who did bring moral diversity to various situations. DS9 simply had more.
Can you describe some of these win win situations? I'm sure TNG had some, but so did DS9. To characterize the series as a whole in complete opposition to DS9 isn't very accurate. It's a different format which really just didn't allow for focus on specific themes.
Those are good examples. I agree that both were stupid decisions, even if I can understand why the characters did it.
I'm not characterizing it as being in "complete opposition to DS9". In fact I would say we probably agree more than we disagree. I think ambiguous morality is something that runs through every ST series. I simply pointed out that I enjoy the contrast that was present, even if it was small in comparison to the similarities they shared.
I think Picard and the borg was explored, in a manner of sorts. It was just more subtle than tense drama. Picard undergoes a complete character arc throughout the series. He starts out as the arrogant but intellectual and inquisitive captain. This is around the first few seasons, he'll often solve dilemmas rather handily and act somewhat patronizing(though not overtly so) to those who transgress upon his code of ethics. His experiences throughout season three begin to give him new insight into alien cultures(who watches the watchers, and others) and he becomes a bit more tempered in his approach and understanding. Then, the borg mess with him. after this he gains more humility, and a desire for greater understanding with less lecturing. He undergoes further trials at the hands of the cardassians and comes out stronger because of his experience with the borg helping to add resilience. Some of his decisions come to bite back, such as with Hugh and the murderous drones that result from his decisions in that instance. All the while he has encounters with Q who acts as somewhat of a spiritual guide. He also gains further enlightenment from experiences such as in 'The Inner Light'. It all builds up to him gaining a deeper understanding and insight into non linear time.
I mean, just because there weren't a bunch of 'now picard directly deals with his borg experience' scenes beyond the family episode, doesn't mean he wasn't dealing with various aspects and themes surrounding it all.
* Argument about DS9 vs TNG
* Sisko punches Q = AWESOME
* I just watched The Visitor and I cried
* OMG The Drumhead/The Inner Light
* There are FOUR lights meme
* Season 8 Twitter Feed
* Star Trek the Porno, related to:
** Holodeck spooge mopping (Space is one big orgy)
* Tuvix argument
* LOL Holodeck episodes
* Wesley is terrible, Nog is great
* Random YouTube clip of Patrick Stewert
* SFDebris review link: I agree
Among others.
TNG had more than one human on the Enterprise. Picard, Riker, Wesley, Dr. Crusher, Dr. Pulaski, Barclay, the O'Brien's, LaForge, Tasha Yar and then there's the humans that they interacted with briefly or re-occurring during the series.
TNG not being a melodrama or a serial like DS9 is a flaw in the format, that's why it's a fair game criticism. They imposed those limits on themselves and sure enough it bit them on the ass. Thankfully DS9 learnt from those mistakes, which is why it has superior storytelling.
Which usually comes from the "Berman and Braga suck!" discussion.
We totally need to do this.
Edit: Lucid, I totally agree about the format allowing for different storytelling.
This double parter is really good, easily two of my favorite episodes out of all of Star Trek. Plus you get to see almost all of the actors without their makeup.
Now that I think about it, I think DS9 has most of my favorite episodes (okay, I can only think of one other; Trials and Tribble-ations).
Duet
In The Hands of the Prophets
The Wire
Explorers
The Visitor
Trials and Tribble-ations
Rocks and Shoals
Waltz
The Magnificent Ferengi (Depends on your opinions of the Ferengi)
In The Pale Moonlight
Far Beyond The Stars
The Siege of AR-558/It's Only a Paper Moon
I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting
Far Beyond the Stars.
Yeah, thats another really good one.
Oceanic's list is filled with good episodes, although I cant remember whether I liked Rocks and Shoals (I kinda think I didnt).
None, the meme is "its faaaaaake" and its from In the Pale Moonlight.
Q. E. muthafuckin' D.
It's the one with
I thought it was pretty potent.
That really was a strong scene.
But the best part about all of this? SG:A addressed it in Season 5 when Shep's team was put on trial, and they only "won" the trial because they basically bribed/blackmailed one of the judges to swing his vote. The rest of the galaxy, and even they to a point, realized just how fucked up they had made things.
Which is way more than Janeway ever learned about the results of her actions.
You forgot redlettermedia.
This could be said of all sorts of things. Your existence may have prevented the existence of another offspring that your parents would have had had you not been born. Your living in North America means someone else isn't. The existence of human beings denies the possibility of the existence of a race of intelligent bird-people. Mutual exclusivity is a fact of the universe. That existence should be a crime because it denies the existence of other things is absurd, since then all existence would be in violation. That's how supervillains justify their attempts to remake the universe.
It also hurts that, when y'know what's coming, you become "LETS GET THERE NOOOOOW".
Some really good stuff I forgot, though, and obviously Dukat and Garak steal every scene.
The one bottle episode where Sisko and Jake go on vacation and end up in the Cardassian system and the Cardassians celebrate and show they're not all bad was good, though. There were several attempts throughout the first three seasons that I forgot about that tried to show that power as more grey and not all bad.
Sigh.
***
Separately, wait, Jeri Ryan and Braga were a thing? What?!
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
OMG INNER LIGHT! Even better than The Visitor! (though just barely).
I hope someday the Subspace Restaurant earns its way onto that list.
Basically the whole arc from "Call to Arms" at the end of Season 5 to the retaking of the station about five episodes into season six represents that show firing on all cylinders.
That doesn't come close to Tuvix situation. His mere existence keeps two people effectively dead by being alive. They're technically not fully dead, either. By pressing a magic button they can come back good as new. The downside is Tuvix ceasing to exist, but what made him was being sent back to the living entities that those parts belonged to originally. By existing Tuvix was effectively taking away their lives. They had no choice in the matter, either.
Now you're being silly.
Except we're not talking about our universe, we're about Trek's which things like this can and do happen.
Your response was worth it for this line alone. :^:
That explains Janeway perfectly...
Think about it for a minute.
Oh my Jesus.
Yeah, somehow I confused Explorers with Rocks and Shoals, even though I memory-alpha'd it, but I guess thats what happens when Im still fucking around on the internet at 4am.
That's what made that ending great.
Tuvix pleads for the crew to save him and they all turn away. Because deep down they want Tuvok and Neelix back. (Ok, maybe just Tuvok).
When it came down to it, to them it was a decision based in emotional attachment to their friends not a decision formed from some axiomatic ethical formulation.
It was Tuvix vs Tuvok/Neelix, one of them had to die forever and they picked the ones their old buddies.
I like this interpretation a lot.