A Picture is Worth a thousand Words... and Views

[kriadydragon]

I'm endlessly fascinated (and, dare I say, amused) by the myriad of views that result from a single show.

I was wandering, as I am wont to do and really need to stop doing, and came upon another rant over the incompetence of the SGA characters - how their stupidity and naivety is always getting them into trouble. How every bad thing that happens to them is their own fault. How everything they do is just plain idiocy.

And, of course, my response is - uh, are you sure it's SGA you're talking about?

This is why I like to use the term "eye of the beholder" so much, because the spectrum of personal views is immeasurable. When I watch SGA, I don't see screw-ups, I see happenstance. Yeah, in some cases, it is their fault when they go to investigate that Wraith signal or that weird hatch. But, well, it is an expedition full of scientists and military; curiosity and ensuring that the natives aren't uber hostile are going to happen, and of course it isn't going to end well. If it did end well, then we wouldn't have an episode ;) (which, for all we know, only one out of five missions actually go wrong). Then there are the incidents that are not their fault - telepathic whales giving people headaches because of killer solar flares, for example.

Then we have the Dues Ex Machina endings, such as in The Siege part three. But, again, let's go back to Echoes, in which John comes up with a plan to use the Daedalus' shields and the ZPM to deflect the solar flare. That isn't dues es machina, that's people solving a problem by using their heads.

But these are my personal views (and keep in mind, because I'm not science savvy, I'm completely ignoring all the science screw-ups ;)). To me, SGA isn't a show of lucky idiots, but of humans. Yes, there will be screw-ups and dues es machina solutions, but I feel SGA to be a plethora of lucky escapes, stupid mistakes, and saving the day with both brain and brawn. In other words, it's a show about people being, well, people: Imperfect but trying, prone to mistake but also intelligence and cleverness, and all around extremely lucky. Something I like to keep in mind when watching a show is to remember: they aren't us, we aren't them. Yeah, from where we're sitting comfortable on our couch, all situations - and their answers - are obvious to us. Yeah, the creation and handling of Micheal wasn't too bright, we saw that from the start. But the thing about us human beings is that all our ideas are awesome when those ideas are first born. Hindsight is, after all, 50/50. The expedition probably had a reason for doing what they did and the way they did it, but it was something the writers didn't feel like explaining to us, didn't have time to, or didn't know how.

Then again, I am pretty lenient and open-minded about a lot of what happens on a show. What a show doesn't show, or tell, or explain is like a blank I fill in for myself *shrugs*.


 

Comments

[karri-kln1671.livejournal.com]

Some of choices that they made came back to haunt them, certainly, but if they never made mistakes, they'd be omnipotent gods, not humans. From my perspective, they did the best they could in very difficult situations. It's true that for the most part they focused on their survival over the survival of others, but that was true for the other human groups in the Pegasus galaxy. It's also true that they didn't always make the right decision, but they did the best with the information and resources that they had. (If John had known that killing the Keeper would wake up all the Wraith -- and had known what the Wraith were, for that matter -- he perhaps would have avoided doing it, but he didn't know at the time; if they'd known that Michael would attempt to destroy everyone on both sides in vengeance, they wouldn't have experimented on him, but at the time it seemed like the best chance for the least amount of destruction and loss of life., etc.)

In the first season, which is when a lot of the things that came back to haunt them began, Atlantis didn’t have the luxuries of allies and knowledge and seemingly limitless resources that the SGC (and thus SG-1 had), yet in my opinion they still didn’t do any worse than SG-1 did. Afteerall, SG-1 managed to make the Earth a target for the Goa’uld and Ori. The SGC scientist also had more than one experiment and/or discovery come back and bite them in the butt and managed to make enemies of potential allies with a misstep that had unforeseen consequences. It’s simply the nature of dealing with the unknown and unimaginable.

[dcdiva.livejournal.com]

And on the same point, back in the beginning, the expedition was lead by a civilian diplomat, Elizabeth, and she even made some comments on a few occasions that she felt she'd been wrong, like when she told Sheppard ( I think) that when she first found out about the wraith she thought she could negotiate with them. I don't think that necessarily makes the way she handled things wrong, but she acknowledges what may have been a mistake, but not something she was stupid about. I totally agree with your point.

I do, on the other hand, have no excuses for their behavior in Inquisition, which I choose to believe doesn't exist. Way to make Sheppard look like an asshole, guys.

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

Everything you said has been my viewpoint pretty much for every season of SGA. Which is why the animosity I sometimes come across boggles and annoys me. The thing about any show is that it's easy to sit their and scoff at the characters for all their mistakes, because we're not in those situations to understand why they made those mistakes. Granted, maybe the writers could have handled the fallout better in some instances, but they did deal with the fallout (which is a heck of a lot more than some shows have done). SGA isn't perfect but I definitely don't think it the crap-fest some people try to make it out to be.

Plus, well, it's still my favorite show. And I tend to be defensive of the things I like.

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

Yes! Mistakes were acknowledged. To me, SGA did well conveying what it would be like to travel to another galaxy. Or, more simply, travel into the unknown, and that it doesn't matter how prepared you think you are, because, really, you can't prepare for what you don't know... if that make sense :/

Yeah, even I agree Inquisition could have been done better. I think the writers got incredibly lazy with that one, pushing out an episode for the sake of it.

[ninja007.livejournal.com]

Oh, as usual, I agree with you. There are so many people out there who are wannabe critics. They find something wrong with everything. You can't make them happy and I pity them, for they can find NO joy in life. I'm sick to death of them. I hate that they think they're so intelligent, and just demonstrate their ignorance.

I always found SGA to be a moral fable. They do their best and always with the best intentions. What do they say about good intentions?

“Hell is paved with good intentions, not bad ones” by George Bernard Shaw.

You're right. These stories were about people we could identify with, getting into trouble and finding a way out.

That's what I loved. These were people, while intelligent, were someone I could indentify with. I immediately identified with Sheppard, as I was in a job where I was a rogue and an outcast in my own family. From the get-go, I wanted to follow his story. It made me FEEL BETTER.

My two cents.

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

What is it they say.. No good deed goes unpunished?

I have recently rewatched SGA's first season. and i have to say that if you take the series just from watching the first season only then pretty much yes.. the initial actions of the team are pretty stupid.

But then you have to take into account that the initial Atlantis team were not set up for the situation that they found themselves in. They were put together as primarily a science team to explore Atlantis (lost city of the Ancients) and find out about it.. they did not know about the power issues, they did not know about eh galaxy's political situation and most of all they were not prepared to have their military leader killed in an early skirmish leaving an inexperienced Major in over all control.. This leaves the whole expedition with an extremely steep learning curve which they only just manage to survive...

I have to say that its blatantly obvious that sheppard, weir and Co are desperately over their head and a paddling like crazy to keep up. It makes it fairly unique in my view for series where the crew is actively having to learn fast and hard to keep up with the universe.

I mean SG1 does have a similar learning curve but its less steep, with earth being difficult to reach by hostiles it meant that the threat though imminent was not as immediate as with Atlantis.

I think a lot of people are used to the Star trek methodology, where they have years of experience meeting aliens, have the prime directive and all that.. The Stargate universe doesn't have that, it has essentially normals going out into the wide wide universe and doing what they do best. If you look at Real Life equivalents and conflicts (putting aside the whole bending physics and other sciences to fit the story:D).. they aren't too far off what would hypothetically happen in similar situations.

Of course we the viewer always get to see more than teh character.. so we can generally be more aware of how stupid a situation can be before teh characters do...

[black-raven135.livejournal.com]

SGA features human beings. (I am now speaking of Sheppard, Rodney, Ronon, Teyla, Weir, Carson, Lorne, Caldwell, etc.)
The fact they are human means mistakes will be made. However, that does not automatically mean they are devoid of intellect, anymore than in
the RL issues of those who are only too happy to point out the failures of the SGA characters. They too make mistakes.
That is part of human life.
And the things that happen in SGA are things which defy ordinary imagination which further complicates the equation.

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

That's the thing about all shows - that it's so dang easy to judge from where we sit when it comes to the decisions these characters make. I think that's why I aimed for writing books over writing screenplays (my mom was certain that I was going to make movies). In books, you have the opportunity to be able to explain, and try to get your readers to understand, why the characters are making these so-called "dumb" decisions. Granted, it's not a guarantee that the readers will sympathize, but, again, the opportunity is there to try. With movies and shows, that's a little bit harder.

And some people like nit-picking flaws. But for those of us who don't, when all you find when it comes to show reviews is a lot of nit-picking, it gets to be incredibly annoying after a while. Sort of like with movie critics - they either love or hate a show, they never point out both the good or bad, it has to be one or the other, which is why they are so unreliable.

I find the characters of SGA incredibly easy to relate to. Sheppard, for example; I totally get his discomfort of being emotionally open. For some people such as myself, it's incredibly difficult to be an emotionally open person - to the point it's actually painful. Which is why, I think, I get so protective of him when people get after him for that inability to open up. I know what it's like, and don't like seeing someone being chastised for it.

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

Ditto to everything... well, except maybe the use of the word stupid. I wouldn't say stupid as that feels a tad too strong. Foolish, maybe, or not-too-bright, but not necessarily stupid. It's very much trial and error to-the-extreme for them, with lots of varying degrees of hit or miss. They've made just as many smart decisions as dumb ones, and many situations weren't even their fault.

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

"And the things that happen in SGA are things which defy ordinary imagination which further complicates the equation."

Exactly. Mistakes are inevitable.

I know a lot of people like to nit-pick flaws for the fun of it. And I get that it's all in fun. The thing is, after a while, when it comes to episode reviews that's pretty much all you get - the flaws, without pointing out what was cool, what worked, how what this or that character did was quite smart. Then it's like some people will get so caught up in the flaws, go so deep - finding moments of sexism and racisms and so on - that they end up utterly despising the show.

The show does have flaws, because what show doesn't, but it also has a lot of good. SGA is very realistic, I think, in handling such an extreme situation realistically. It's not going to be neat and tidy solutions, it's going to be trial, error, a lot of happenstance and trying to muddle through and not die in the process.

[black-raven135.livejournal.com]

"....it's going to be trial, error, a lot of happenstance and trying to muddle through and not die in the process."

**nods**
That is what fighting for survival is all about, whether in Pegasus or elsewhere.......
Mistakes are made because we are speaking of human involvement, or have they forgotten that?
I believe they might in their quest to point the accusing finger.........
And that is what makes it so unconscionable for me.

[novembersga.livejournal.com]

Okay, I have to agree with most of what has already been said above, and what I'm about to say may make me supremely unpopular, but I really don't see why some people are so ready to condemn the show, characters and their actions.

I take exception to the constant reminder of Sheppard's 'black mark' I mean, so what? SG-1 behaved that way as a rule in some episodes and although Sheppard received his black mark in the service of 'regular' miltary, his treatment is extreme especially by those in the Stargate Program who don't seem to be bothered when anyone from SG-1 does it -

As for Sheppard waking the Wraith, no, he had no idea what would happen only that there were people to rescue. He even gave in to Weir and waited until she was satisfied that he had a decent chance of success. As a result, he was too late to save one of the Athosians and his CO. It really didn't matter if he killed the Wraith 'watcher' or not, they would have awakened anyway. She was 'interrogating' his CO and had already learned of earth. Had John not been there, she would have learned of it's location as well. Information on such a new and large/rich feeding ground would have triggered them all to awaken to begin their trek to the Milky Way.

Over-all, no they are not perfect. They are human. They did the best that they could and even though you and I as viewers have the big picture, many times they did not. They did what they thought was right and things didn't always go to plan, (when do they ever) I have to say after seeing some of SG-1's escapades, Atlantis did very well. (Don't get me wrong I like SG-1 I just don't understand why everyone hammers on Atlantis. Uh, 'pot' meet 'kettle'

Michael was probably not the best idea, but as Beckett said, they were looking for an alternative to mass extermination of a species and it was down to us or them.

In inquisition, John saw the court for what it was. A Kangaroo Court only there for appearances and in no way interested in actual justice. I believe John was tired of being hounded into the ground for years by people who placed a disproportionate amount of blame on the expedition and he is not a lawyer nor negotiator. That falls to Woolsey and I was disappointed when Woolsey tried to bribe or 'deal' their way out instead of presenting their argument. (The writer's missed a great opportunity here) He may have recognized their intent as well but it could have been handled much differently/better.

This is my favorite show, yes. And they did do a few things that made me go 'no, don't do that' but to a much lesser extent than most shows do. I don't understand why the 'critic bullies' are picking on Atlantis. They don't deserve it.

*Okay, I'm off my soap-box now*

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

Every show has its viewers who only watch to rip it to shreds. And I think others get so caught-up in the nit-picking that all they see are the flaws. There was a time, when the nit-picking was super heavy, that all the negativety started weighing me down and making me dislike the show. then I would actually watch the show and wonder what the heck my problem was. I finally stopped reading all the nit-picking and focused only one what I liked about the show, not its flaws.

But I still run into a lot of animosity from time to time, and it makes me wonder if these people are watching the same show I am. It really is crazy the various views people have of a show. There was this one person who was dead-certain that Sheppard as a manipulative gay socio-path, and they would always try to convince others of the same. It blew my mind because Sheppard, a socio-path? Mr. Leave no one behind? I can't even begin to fathom where that person got that idea. Perosanlly, I just think they didn't like Sheppard, so want to paint him in a bad light.

Which is what I really hate - when a person's view of a character is tainted by dislike. Because then we have to suffer that view in fiction, and there's really no reason for it.

[novembersga.livejournal.com]

'Every show has its viewers who only watch to rip it to shreds.'

'I just think they didn't like Sheppard, so want to paint him in a bad light. Which is what I really hate - when a person's view of a character is tainted by dislike. Because then we have to suffer that view in fiction, and there's really no reason for it.'

*nods* It can be very frustrating.

This person in question had to be heavily medicated AND watching a totally different show because......????? If you tied the show in a pretzel it still wouldn't be as skewed as this person's point of view. It takes a very bitter person to twist reality to that extreme. Everyone is free to like or dislike whatever they want. If they don't like it though, why not just leave it alone. I don't understand their need to smear the show or characters. It's malicious.

I try to stay away from those who like nothing better than tear someone down and twist them to the point that they are unrecognizable but sometimes no matter how hard you try, you are still going to come across it. I've even tried reasoning with some of them and it's just not possible.

I miss SGA so much, so I refuse to let them color my opinion of the show. It's not perfect, nothing ever is, but in my opinion it's pretty close. In fact, I think sometimes it makes me feel more protective of my show. (kind of a knee-jerk reaction I guess) It's not as easy as it sounds because I find distasteful things very hard to forget but I am getting better at it. The further I get from the negativity the better I feel.

When I do run across these types of people/things, I get out my favorite episode or re-read my favorite fanfic and it takes me to my happy place. (Some days it takes several episodes or fics or combination thereof to scrub the ick and hatefulness from my brain)

[kriadydragon.livejournal.com]

What is it about crap that requires a ton of good stuff to clean out your brain? When ever I run into a fic that squicks me, it takes about five favorite fic to get it out of my head :P.

I'm just as knee-jerk with my protectiveness, especially these days. I was a part of something that I had to quit as I felt it too Rodney-is-awesome and Sheppard's-a-dork. What they were saying wasn't vicious or bashing, but it wasn't exactly positive, either, and it was starting to bring me down.

[ninja007.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about Sheppard. It was also the way he was raised. His father sounds like the kind of guy who was emotionally closed off and not demonstrative of his affections.

I also agree with you about some people being a critic who hate or love everything. The one thing I learned early on, was that critics of any kind have an agenda or something their are looking for in a movie, book or show. If whatever they're reviewing doesn't meet that criteria, they hate it.

I want to be entertained and I need to identify with a character, in order to be interested in what happens to him...

I don't care what critics say, but tptb and wright, cooper, and mallozzi do...

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

Maybe "stupid" is a strong descriptor, although I am not describing the character themselves as "stupid". I mean Sheppard and the gang are individually most definately not stupid, maybe a bit crazy, prone to over excitement... but not stupid.