SGA! OMG!

[permetaform]

So I gave in and watched Critical Mass this morning.

HOLY SHIT.

HOLY *FUCKING* SHIT.

I love my show, So SO sososososososo Much. Like, MUCH. Like my love burns with the passion of a fire of a thousand burning ZPMS. O.M.G.

Comments

[loligo.livejournal.com]

But... but... this was the worst episode EVER!! Torture is one of those things like rape or the Holocaust that you just shouldn't touch in your fiction unless you're going to take it seriously, and, well, they didn't. Or if *that* was the writers taking it seriously, we're going to have to see a follow-up episode in which Elizabeth is removed from command and John's hidden sociopathic tendencies are explored, because DUDE, their decisions were bad and wrong and they don't even seem that bothered by it.

[permetaform]

::blinks:: to be honest, I'm just glad that they *went* there instead of chickening out. I'm glad that they played the Kavanaugh fainting bit, because I needed the humor there, and I trust the show enough to wait for them to address this more later on; I mean, they'd addressed how compromised Weir's leadership is (which had me cheering at the scene, because even as I love that Weir is taking an alternative route to leadership, it's a damned problematic method frequently, especially with the way that she's lead by her emotions and I LOVE that Kavanaugh called her on that). Well, that and it's a show about scorched-earth war...I was sorta expecting the torture to happen ever since Poisoning The Well and I'm glad that they actually went for in this relentless manner.

[spike21.livejournal.com]

I feel as you feel on the torture point. They're doing things differently, they're full of flaws, I trust that this will bite them on the ass down the line and I'm good with that. I sort of wonder if my easy acceptance has to do with having been in an abusive relationship with my former primary fandom (SV used to beat me and call me names and still I stayed with it for the kids...) but on the other hand SGA already goes places that I need it to go, so... yeah. I really liked the ep and I'm glad I'm not alooooone here.

[permetaform]

Wait. You're kidding me. People didn't like this ep?? o.o

what??? Do I need to make a bulleted list and squee over each thing? 'cause they're really too numerous to name. o.0

And god, really, I've said this before, but I'll say it again that I really love that they have characters with flaws. And hell, when I say flaws, I mean flaws that'll make you HATE the character, except then they do something magnificent and you love them *despite* the glaring flaw that, really?, isn't going to go away. At all, no redemption, no quarter.

And I am SO with you on the SV thing, also at one point HP fanon used to be one of my fandoms (I still haven't read any of the books)...and, well. ::covers eyes::

[aotearoagal.livejournal.com]

Must admit, I thought it was done badly - especially at their reaction to it at the end. They're the heroes, and they had me rooting for Kavanaugh and the Goa'uld *g*

[castalianspring.livejournal.com]

I'm with you. Kavanagh had nothing but good points to make, and I felt bad for the guy. It sucks when you're such a misfit you can't fit in with all the other misfits who've been shipped out to another galaxy.

The ending was the worst, mostly b/c the only reason Weir and Sheppard felt bad about what happened was b/c Kavanagh was innocent. Not b/c they were willing to torture one of their own people, but b/c they were wrong about him. Totally the wrong moral position to take.

[permetaform]

I'm with you. Kavanagh had nothing but good points to make, and I felt bad for the guy. It sucks when you're such a misfit you can't fit in with all the other misfits who've been shipped out to another galaxy.

EXACTLY. I think that's the *point*, to have you rooting for Kav, because this is Elizabeth's Trinity and you're supposed to see her as flawed. It's not the wrong moral position, but---

OH.

Umm..don't take this the wrong way, but are you upset the show didn't uphold Family Values?

[castalianspring.livejournal.com]

Not at all. Since when is saying torture is wrong limited to being "family values"? That's a pretty basic bit of social morality, IMO, so I do think it was the wrong moral decision, for whatever definition of moral you choose. Elizabeth is supposed to a great diplomat and humanitarian, and yet her objection to the idea of torturing Kavanagh wasn't "no, torture is wrong and it doesn't work anyway", it was "but what if he's innocent?". That just goes way past flawed, to me.

I think the thing people are having trouble with is that they showed military officers, the good guys, torturing people with electric wires. In light of current affairs, and considering the history these writers have with trying to put clumsy social commentary in their shows...it doesn't sit well. Especially since they didn't come out and say those actions were wrong. Sure, Weir felt bad, but at the end of the day, what they did worked and saved the day. I'm not convinced Weir learned anything beyond that she does tend to make judgements based on emotions. She got off too easy. She and Shep both deserved to have been faced with a maimed Kavanagh, who has every right to run back to Earth and bring the lot of them up on charges.

[permetaform]

Not at all. Since when is saying torture is wrong limited to being "family values"? That's a pretty basic bit of social morality, IMO, so I do think it was the wrong moral decision, for whatever definition of moral you choose.

erg, um, you misunderstand me. I say Family Values like the show is being a 'parent'; like it's attempting to teach social morality, rather than just representing reality.


and yet her objection to the idea of torturing Kavanagh wasn't "no, torture is wrong and it doesn't work anyway", it was "but what if he's innocent?

But the thing is, what *if* Kavanagh wasn't innocent? It's like that whole thing with capital punishment; I am all for serial murders being given the death sentance. BUT, who's going to make sure that the "serial murders" are actually guilty?

And honestly, it's not like our current leaders aren't attempting to make the same sort of decisions right now, in the past, and in the future.


Especially since they didn't come out and say those actions were wrong.

Exactly. "Family Values". The show isn't preaching. I don't think I need to be spoonfed the definition of right and wrong, 'cause I mean we all know it at this point no? Has there been anyone that came out saying, "Torture, yay!"??


I'm not convinced Weir learned anything beyond that she does tend to make judgements based on emotions. She got off too easy.

::nods:: EXACTLY. It's not like our current leaders don't get away with controversial decisions, because it's catch-22 no matter where you look. And yet they're still leaders because someone's got to make those decisions, and they're not punished for them because they get results.

Again, think Rodney in Trinity.


She and Shep both deserved to have been faced with a maimed Kavanagh, who has every right to run back to Earth and bring the lot of them up on charges.

::blinks:: that's supposing that Elizabeth's arc has ended...which, really, I think this is the jumping off point for more murky waters.

[castalianspring.livejournal.com]

erg, um, you misunderstand me. I say Family Values like the show is being a 'parent'; like it's attempting to teach social morality, rather than just representing reality.

Well, I'm not saying I want the show to preach at me (mostly b/c it would be spectacularly bad at it). But when they go out of their way to address a topic like torture, and then don't have anyone saying hey, that was probably a bad thing to do...some actions do need to be condemned. In Trinity, Rodney had plenty of people yelling at him. There were consequences. Elizabeth didn't get any consequences, b/c they chickened out and let Kavanagh pass out before anything could happen to me.

But the thing is, what *if* Kavanagh wasn't innocent? It's like that whole thing with capital punishment; I am all for serial murders being given the death sentance. BUT, who's going to make sure that the "serial murders" are actually guilty?

That's where the difference comes in between a serial killer getting a trial with a jury and someone like Kavanagh getting only one person (who happens to have a personal grudge against him) making the decisions. Kavanagh's point about him being guilty until proven innocent...there are just too many parallels to things happening today, and if they were trying to make some sort of social commentary on torture by military personnel, they dropped the ball by not saying the military shouldn't get away with things like that, no matter what the reason.

Exactly. "Family Values". The show isn't preaching. I don't think I need to be spoonfed the definition of right and wrong, 'cause I mean we all know it at this point no? Has there been anyone that came out saying, "Torture, yay!"??

Not out right, but then, torture saved the day. The writers let that strategy work for them, and though Weir felt bad about it, what's stopping them from doing the same thing next time they need information? They may not be saying "torture, yay", but they're saying torture, while messy and therefore left to people like Ronon, gets results. The ends justify the means.

::nods:: EXACTLY. It's not like our current leaders don't get away with controversial decisions, because it's catch-22 no matter where you look. And yet they're still leaders because someone's got to make those decisions, and they're not punished for them because they get results.

We're saying the same things, but using the same words for different arguments.

Again, think Rodney in Trinity.

Rodney was punished, though. Weir took him to task for his actions, and I'm betting she wouldn't give him so much leeway again if he asked for it, not after the scope of that disaster. But without anyone keeping her in check, she's either going to get away with making bad decisions or someone's going to take leadership from her, and either way we end up with a negative portrait of her as a leader.

::blinks:: that's supposing that Elizabeth's arc has ended...which, really, I think this is the jumping off point for more murky waters.

I hope they do more with it. But then I think back on SG1 and I have a hard time giving the writers that much credit. I suppose we'll see.

[permetaform]

Well, I'm not saying I want the show to preach at me (mostly b/c it would be spectacularly bad at it). But when they go out of their way to address a topic like torture, and then don't have anyone saying hey, that was probably a bad thing to do...some actions do need to be condemned.

...um. Those two sentances you just wrote? They contradict each other. By wanting "anyone saying hey, that was probably a bad thing to do", that is preaching. "condemnation", of any kind at all, is sorta preaching. This is also sorta how it works in the real world; deus ex machina only shows up in novels, not real life.


In Trinity, Rodney had plenty of people yelling at him. There were consequences.

And yet Rodney never changes, Rodney is still RODNEY and snarking back at the Asgard and pushing people out of chairs and STILL has no respect for Carson. Rodney got yelled at 'cause he disagreed with Weir and she was mad at him (and he pointed out that he blew up 5/6ths of a solar system, all pleased, instead of *just* 3/4ths), and that she out-ranked him. No one on Atlantis out-ranks Weir.


and if they were trying to make some sort of social commentary on torture by military personnel, they dropped the ball by not saying the military shouldn't get away with things like that, no matter what the reason.

::blinks:: again, I think you're missing the point of my argument in that I don't think SGA is making social commentary, they are showing *characters* and making social observations. SGA is impartial, sorta like NYPD Blue, there's no agenda behind the story they're telling.


We're saying the same things, but using the same words for different arguments.

Um, no. I think we are approaching the show from two different places. SGA really isn't like other sci-fi shows, it's not about *heroic* archetypes in this show. There are no *heroes* in this show. There are no black and white, there's black and *grey*. There are no right answers, it always, ALWAYS comes back to blow up in their faces.


I have a hard time giving the writers that much credit

...ah. Can the writers never get anything correct?

[castalianspring.livejournal.com]

...um. Those two sentances you just wrote? They contradict each other. By wanting "anyone saying hey, that was probably a bad thing to do", that is preaching. "condemnation", of any kind at all, is sorta preaching. This is also sorta how it works in the real world; deus ex machina only shows up in novels, not real life.

I don't think it's preaching if a character feels they made a wrong decision. They could have had opposing sides in the issue without making a heavy-handed statement of morality. And yes, deux ex machina only happens in stories, and boy, did it ever happen in this story. Which is why the ending kinda sucked.

And yet Rodney never changes, Rodney is still RODNEY and snarking back at the Asgard and pushing people out of chairs and STILL has no respect for Carson.

*blinks* I think we're watching different shows. I think Rodney's changed a lot, especially from his SG1 days. Where do you get the idea Rodney has no respect for Carson?

::blinks:: again, I think you're missing the point of my argument in that I don't think SGA is making social commentary, they are showing *characters* and making social observations. SGA is impartial, sorta like NYPD Blue, there's no agenda behind the story they're telling.

Impartial? I can't agree. These are the same people who wrote and continue to write SG1, and both shows try to make social commentary the same as any other sci-fi show.

Um, no. I think we are approaching the show from two different places. SGA really isn't like other sci-fi shows, it's not about *heroic* archetypes in this show. There are no *heroes* in this show. There are no black and white, there's black and *grey*. There are no right answers, it always, ALWAYS comes back to blow up in their faces.

I keep seeing this argument, and I have to wonder where it's coming from. I love SGA, but it's not some new, amazingly original sci-fi show. It's like a lot of other SF; hell, it blatantly steals pretty much all of its plots from other SF (usually the best ones, which is why it's working so well). They're mixing it up a little, and doing some truly interesting things, but it's not the first SF show to have heroes who aren't really heroes. I think we really are approaching the show from very different angles. It's certainly resulting in some interesting discussion :)

I have a hard time giving the writers that much credit

...ah. Can the writers never get anything correct?

Ask any SG fan that question about RC Cooper and Damian Kindler and you'll get some interesting answers. The writers can produce some gems and then turn around and write the worst drivel imaginable. I really love SGA, but I just don't see it the same way many of you seem to.

*materialises*

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

But when they go out of their way to address a topic like torture, and then don't have anyone saying hey, that was probably a bad thing to do...some actions do need to be condemned.

It was oddly silent on it, and I'm... not sure they even realised it was An Issue. Like it assumed the whole world reckons torture would work there and the *only* issue is with torturing innocent people. Which, really, wtf?

And not that that couldn't work to make us just think less of the characters, but I'm not convinced that's what they were going for. It's all so... casual, if that's the right word. And there's a huge spectrum between preaching and pretending it's all okay, which is the feeling I got from it overall. Even that bit at the end, I just *reflexively* thought that no, they're not as bad as the Wraith, but since then I've wondered about them making that comparison - is the idea that we will jump that way on the false comparison and absolve them of all guilt?


*demateralises*

[permetaform]

they had me rooting for Kavanaugh and the Goa'uld

Yes. I think that's the *point*. This is Elizabeth's Trinity. You're *supposed* to find her flawed and you're *supposed* to hate and question her flaws.

[aotearoagal.livejournal.com]

I didn't like how she wasn't more upset about what was done to Kavanaugh. Sure, he's a whiny bitch. But he called her on her personality -- and he was right -- and that's all she needed to determine he was guilty. That sucks. If she was my manager, I'd quit in protest. Or usurp her command, whichever was quickest *g*

[fan-this.livejournal.com]

Not with the passion of a fire of a thousand burning ZPMS? Shame on you.

[permetaform]

HEE! true! ::goes to fix::

[lierdumoa.livejournal.com]

I have meta'd.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/lierdumoa/241751.html

You do not answer your phone.

Also?

AGREE. OMGSOMUCHAGREE.