What Did Jeri Ryan Think of My Seven of Nine Video? (Trek, Actually Comment Responses)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лют 2020
- ▶Watch more Trek, Actually videos at: • Trek, Actually
▶Listen to our Trek-themed comedy podcast, The Ensign's Log:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / the-ensigns-log-podcast
▶Website: www.lemmelistenpodcasts.com/th...
▶Patreon: / steveshives
▶PayPal: www.paypal.me/SteveShives
▶Twitter: / steve_shives
▶Facebook: / thatguysteveshives
▶Instagram: / steve.shives
Listen to the Late Seating podcast:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / late-seating
▶Website: www.lemmelistenpodcasts.com/la... - Розваги
A griffon agrees to carry a screenwriter across a deep canyon. "I must warn you", says the griffon. "I'm allergic to overused animal fables. As soon as I hear one, I get cramps and can't fly anymore." "Don't worry", says the screenwriter.
In midair, halfway across the chasm,, the screenwriter starts telling the story with the scorpion and the frog. Immediately the griffon's wings start to spasm, and they plummet. "Why did you do that?" he yells, as they are tumbling down into the abyss. "I can't help it", the screenwriter replies. "It's in my nature."
You beautiful, glorious, demented son of a bitch. I love you so much right now that it makes me wish I could have babies so I could carry yours.
To Steve's eternal ban on that fable, could I also ban everybody and his brother singing Cohen's Hallelujah?
I don't know why I find jokes about this fable so funny. I just know I do.
@@paulsmart4672is finding them funny...in your nature?
@@heidikickhouse- Are we still allowed to listen to kd lang and John Cale's wonderful covers? Because I think they really did it justice.
And don't worry, one of the rules with my band, Avalanche, (we do nothing but metal covers of Leonard Cohen) is that we will NEVER touch Hallelujah.
Remember that time when the showrunners decided to add a character to a Star Trek series to increase its sex appeal? No, I mean the first time, when they added Chekov.
I was 12 when Checkov was introduced in 1967 and a big Monkees' fan. Too late! I was already devoted to Captain Kirk and Mickey Dolenz.
The second time being Rikers beard
And Morn from DS9.
@@theevilascotcompany9255 morn knew how to attract the ladies
Jeri Ryan was 100 percent added as eye candy. The real antifeminist position is thinking that because she is super hot...she can only be a sex lure for the audience. In fact her character took over the show not because of her sex appeal but because the character was written with depth and arguably the best arch in the show...and she killed the performance!
?
"In fact"... are you just re-explainig what was already said by Steve, multiple times?
I'm kinda missing the point of your comment...
"The real antifeminist position is thinking that because she is super hot...she can only be a sex lure for the audience"
I dunno, that sounds pretty similar to what comes out of most self-titled feminists I've seen...
@@TiagoTiagoT
and nothing what I've seen, and I'm a feminist, surrounded by like-minded (some would say I live in a bubble)
Guess you're misunderstanding some things, strawmen, confirmation bias, something?
@@al.the. You and your friends need to be more active and denounce the "bad feminists" then
@@TiagoTiagoT
and you should stop beating your wife...
/s
now when we're at that level of dishonesty
Even Ryan knew she was T&A.. Hello, CATSUIT...I mean really. And somewhere along ther way we stopped seeing the Cat Suit and saw 7 as a person.. a really phenomenal, incredible person.
She even fought to wear those heels. Like, go big or go home.
She knew how much she was typecast to the point that in Dracula 2000 she could deliver her lines about the cameraman getting her tna in the shot without breaking character.
. . . and flawed . . . .
In terms of conservatives in the fandom, I was raised in a conservative christian homeschool household. I was not allowed to watch regular tv, advertisements, non christian kid shows, etc… But my parents still kept their vhs tape recordings of season 1 of Next Gen. I would slide that tape in, and prepare to be on another planet. I got upset when my dad got really into Kirk and the overtly sexual or mysoginistic episodes and then preach modesty to me, threatening to leave me on the side of the road on the way to church when he noticed I had eye shadow on. I loved Picard and Beverly and for the first time found relationships without marriage as the be-all-end-all to be something of interest and import. I remember not realizing how gay I was though until well after. And then I found Voyager. Seeing the strong female roles when I had always been given conflicting stories from my family growing up with wonderful. I saw a series that my father had used to enjoy his sexuality (while shaming mine) transform itself into something I could feel proud. It was revolutionary for me.
It kind of hurts my heart how much I hear you deride the show, but I understand lol. We all have a least favorite trek series and captain. But Janeway is my all time favorite captain, and Seven is my favorite non-captain character, with Picard and Bev in second place. Conservatives definitely have a place in the fandom, as weird as it sounds, and a lot of it comes from their own desires that they separate from their religion or politics. My family would complain about how leftist it was and warn me away from it, saying they just stayed for the cool plots. And lots of other conservative, christian, science-rejecting homeschoolers I knew grew up on trek and were your definite never-touched-a-woman hardcore geeks in Dixon Hill trenchcoats and hats, holding a tricorder. No joke. That was my childhood lol
As far as your analysis of voyager and Janeway tho:
I think there’s not enough emphasis on Janeway though and her own personal growth. I don’t hear enough from you about that, which makes sense since you aren’t a fan of her. But. In terms of trek lore, she deserves a ton more. She had always struggled with depression, and had a deep, repressed kneejerk reaction to the idea of losing somebody, or not taking the moral high ground. In the academy, she was on a test flight with her father (an admiral) and her fiance. The ship crashed into ice. She tried so hard to save them both with the broken transporter that by the time she had enough power to grab both their patterns, they had both slipped beneath the water and died. She never quite recovered.
So much of her erratic morality on the show was her being torn three ways. One, was her struggle to be the exemplary starfleet captain deserving of bringing her crew home even though it was her fault they were in the delta quadrant for the long haul. Two, was her private life, struggling with depression (the start of season 5 had Mulgrew finally having control of her character. Wanting her to go through change and to show a female captain with emotional struggles still trying to perform her duty in the midst of the existentialism and pit of despair). Three was her ptsd of losing people because of inaction. She often made way more decisions out of that panic to not lose what family she thought she had left. And then other times trying to be the moral starfleet captain (like with species 8472) and fight so hard to save everyone that she risked killing them all just like her father and fiance.
Not acknowledging that is such a disservice to her character arc, one Mulgrew fought tooth and nail to obtain despite the Producers stonewalling her for years. I found it quite refreshing to see a captain who was all over the place, who struggled to keep her moral compass and not fall back on trite “The doctor’s a hologram. He’s like a replicator” dehumanization of problems. Trying to box Seven so that she was someone she FINALLY saved (instead of condemning to decades away from home, or certain death, or like her father/fiance), but couldn’t release from that fantasy of ‘perfect savior’. There’s just so much more depth. I’d love to see you address that sometime in the future!
I know this comment is old (and you may have already discovered this) but I highly recommend Jessie Gender's two channels - Jessie Gender and Jessie Gender After Dark. If you like ladies and are a Voyager fan, Jessie is your gal. You'll have tons of cool stuff to check out in her backlog. One of her catchphrases is "By Janeway!"
She did an amazing cinematic vid based on the "fear itself" episode that's impressive and awesome regardless of what someone may think of Voyager.
Hope you enjoy the trek!
thank you for writing and sharing all of that, i enjoyed reading. Sorry you had it rough, glad you got out of that.
As a sexual abuse and rape survivor, the quote from Picard in "Family" always makes me tear up because it hits me oh so close to the bone... "I should have been strong enough to stop them. Why couldn't I stop them?" That says it all...
Thank you for sharing you story. That scene hits a lot of layers. Just know, you are not alone and you are not to blame. Please take care.
He gave a lot to that performance from his regret as well that he couldn't stop his abusive father sooner.
Thank you for sharing. ii can't imagine experiencing what you had to go through. I never thought about it before, but now I think that Picard's forced assimilation could be seen as comperable to sexual abuse. His body was physically violated in an extremely traumatic way.
Media has to tell the parable of the scorpion and the frog. It’s their nature.
Like the scorpion that cons the frog into carrying it across a pond. Do you know the parable of the scorpion and the frog? Have you heard of it? It's a kinda big deal.
@@kmikl It is not a tale the Jedi would have told you.
There is an alternate version I love: Where, when frog asks the scorpion why he did it, that he will drown as well, the Scorpion replies "But, little frog....I can swim."
THE SCORPION WAS ME!!!!
Touche.
I would argue that, in Dr. Soong's absence, Picard served as Data's primary father-figure, and that his grief over Data's death can best be compared to that of a parent who has outlived their child. Patrick Stewert has said in interviews that he thinks that, because Picard never had children, he sort of related to his crew that way.
I would like to know what's Garak's take on the fable of the scorpion and the frog.
I think he might identify with the scorpion to some extent...maybe...
I didn't know I needed that! Now I desperately want to know his take
@@derpimusmaximus8815 "Never tell the same lie twice!"
I'll write a scene for it! Read it below:
Garak seemed comforted by the cynical hyper-reality of Cardassian Justice: everyone is guilty of something, it is just a matter of finding out what, and allowing the punishment of the guilty to provide everyone with the Catharsis necessary to endure their separate shame and strive to serve the state nobly.
I think the first thing he would ask is "Delightful story, doctor, but I have one question--who are we, in the story? Or the narrator, who are they?"
Doc: "Well, I don't think there is--"
Garak: "Oh Doctor, there's always an audience. On Cardassia, we have a similar story, and I'll spare you the details, except to say that in our telling, the 'frog' is more like a... large turtle, and our river is filled with a kind of tiny, biting fish, common to Cardassia. The scorpion needs the sturdy turtle to cross safely, and the sensible and kindly turtle, secure in its dominion over the river and its fishes, agrees to help the scorpion. As in both, the one kills the other, and as in both, they both die--but in ours, the death is not by drowning, but by devourment."
Doc [aghast]: "That's horrible. And cruel."
Garak: "No doctor, that's life. You see, the difference between our stories is not that yours is kind and mine is cruel, but that we know our place in it. Your people WRESTLE with the structure of guilt, and with the nature of good and evil, as if we could ever really say if it was the turtle's fault--"
Doc [musing]: "You know, I have heard it as a turtle before-"
Garak: "--or the scorpion, or some amount shared between them, when none of that matters. Regarding the turtle, and the scorpion, matters of kindness or foolishness, guilt, or right or wrong, are rendered meaningless in view of that higher judgment: they are dead, and we, you and I, the fish, have eaten them. Life continues. Life, time... the river... society. It keeps on flowing. Nature, doctor."
a pause.
Garak: "Doctor Bashir... do the turtles eat the fish on your homeworld too?"
Doc: "Yes, I believe they do."
@@neilwickman Nice work there.
I would go even further and say that there is ample evidence that Picard would take Data’s death hard. I actually think Data is in many ways, like a son to Picard. Data has a child like quality throughout the series, particularly early on, and Picard is often the person teaching, nurturing, and protecting him. Picard teaches him about death, failure, emotion, gives him his first command, all things a good father would do for his son. Picard has no children of his own and has lost his family to tragedy, and Data is a way in which his family legacy could go on. Worst of all, Data dies saving Picard life. A father would give his life for his son. It’s not supposed to happen the other way around. I think Picard would be devastated by Data’s death. He’s not just a colleague or even a friend. He’s family.
@meisteckhart: You're watching STAR TREK: PICARD, right?
mindyp51d my comments were in reference to the criticism that Picard wouldn’t be so upset about losing data or that they weren’t close, and I am referencing mostly evidence from TNG and movies prior to the new show.
@@meisteckhart Ah, I get it.
Considering Picard's admitted dislike of children, it's intriguing that Data's combined maturity of knowledge, naivete of experience and childlike curiosity brings Picard and Data closer.
They all are. Every commander has exactly that problem . . . .
Regarding the writers, I still remember reading about when the 'year of hell' story idea was conceived as an entire season, and how energized they were about being able to create stories about this incredibly interesting idea, then how depressed they were when the idea went to the producers and... nope two episodes. Then the, ah well, back to lets just crank this out for a pay check I guess.
Like yeah the writing was mostly not good, but oh man from what I read does it feel like they were just beaten into submission.
Seven of Nine was the reason I got into Star Trek. In my college years, my brother was doing a watch through of every Trek series and he was on Voyager when he moved back into the family house. While sharing space with him, I became fascinated with Seven and her struggles with being human, which drove me to start watching Voyager and other series on my own. She will forever be a favorite for me.
Regarding Voyager's doctor and his right to self-integrity, a cross-reference:
_Whether we are based on carbon or silicon makes no fundamental difference. We should each be treated with appropriate respect._
-- Dr. R. Chandra, *2010*
And keeping that in mind, when he aided the rebel holograms, he should have been punished accordingly, not treated with kid gloves as he was by Janeway
As in The Culture universe, the rarest and most important resource in the universe is Mind. The substrate upon which Mind occurs is not important.
@Wallace Non-sequitur, but that would be fun.
I literally just watched 2010 yesterday.
the argument is whether or not he was sentient. I don't believe he was, he wasn't another Data. He was strictly a computer program.
You guys are missing the point. We *DID* hear Archer's speech. Kirk read it every week on TOS.
Thank you!
I know it was established somewhere, I forget where exactly, that that was the central part of Starfleet's mission statement, but I never thought that it might be because it was a significant part of the speech at the founding of the Federation. I kind of like that.
Isn't that mostly a Zefram Cochrane quote, though?
@@Nimelennar If I remember correctly, he said some of it yes. As for the idea that it is also the core of Archer's speech (not the whole thong I should think), if you're going to steal, steal from the best and all.
@@scaper8 Plus, wasn't Cochran (more or less) Archer's godfather or something? Or at least such a close friend of the family that he probably grew up calling him 'Uncle Zefram'? Him quoting Cochran would be seen as bittersweet.
Regarding Janeway’s Admiralty...wasn’t there a reference in Nemesis (or was it in VOY: Endgame??) to Janeway having racked up more first contacts than anybody else and that was a major factor in her promotion? Right along with wiping out the FREAKING BORG?!? I swear I remember something like that.
It all depends upon what information was brought up to the brass from the crew....regarding several log entries.....
Steve: I won't make a big deal out of Jeri Ryan seeing my video
Also Steve: releases a nearly hour long video
Totally not breaking his arm patting himself on the back, eh?
On the contrary, I remember Steve reserving the right to be "insufferable" about it (not that this little sidenote was insufferable).
If anything like that ever happened to me I would be dining out on it fore v e r.
@shurednichso can someone please point me to the timestamp? I skipped video and couldn't find it.
@@mateo_sid same im waiting for someone to post the timestamp ughhh
Do you think they cut Archer's speech because it contained the story of the "Scorpion and the Frog"? In case you have not heard the story: Scorpion and Frog, at the River. The River Temarc in winter. Scorpion with a stinger, the beast at Tanagra. Frog on the ocean. Scorpion his arms wide. Frog and Scorpion on the ocean. Frog and Scorpion at Tanagra. Frog at court, the court of silence. Zima at Anzo. Frog, his face black, his eyes red. Shaka when the walls fell.
I guess this Scorpion was a Daoist.
When I first saw the preview image, I legit thought this was going to be 50 minutes of Steve fanboying over Jeri Ryan. Which, totally understandable.
I think Seven of Nine & the Doctor were the two best characters on the show. They did have a proper character arch and grew throughout the show where everyone else was completely static and boring.
I mean, they had to most room to grow. Poor Ensign Harry Kim. Harry was already a flesh and blood, trained Starfleet officer. Whereas The Doctor and Seven had to learn to how to be crew members of a larger collective (pun intended), have personal lives/relationships, and still find out what kind of individuals they want to be.
It's the whole coming of age story and there's a lot of mileage for it. Too bad, Wesley never got that arc. Probably, because he was written as such a super fan that he already knew how to act and behave on a starship and the roles/responsibilities of Starfleet. If they made him more like Nog or Jake Sisko, they could have shown more growth for him.
@@AggieNCharry spent too much time dying to have proper growth
I like your reasoning for Janeway being promoted to Admiral. It’s the same reason Riggs and Murtaugh were promoted to Captain’s rank in Lethal Weapon 4. “You’re way too reckless to have running around without any supervision, so we will just promote you to keep an eye on you.”
My favorite Picard Moment might be the last scene in the show, when he finally comes to the poker game. It shows how much he’s changed and how much more open he’s become.I did always think the one thing they should have added to the scene is Picard saying “Computer Earl Grey……Iced.”
"It is possible to commit no mistakes, and still lose."
Steve: "Yeah, it doesn't mean you fucked up, just the other person was better...There's not necessarily anything you could do different to change it and you should accept that. It's a very difficult bit of wisdom for us to accept."
Clearly Steve has never played League of Legends.
"That is not a weakness. That is life."
Every sports event ever. LOL isn't the standard here. To quote Bender from Futurama, "SECOND PLACE?! That's a fancy word for losing!"
In “Latent Image” they were still processing the idea that the Doctor was a person. By the end of the episode Janeway realized she had made a mistake and did her best to fix it. I think it is a good example of how racism works. When you see someone a certain way for so long, i don’t think that viewpoint can change with one epiphany. It is a process. I’m not sure I explained this well.
You did a good job. That was also a factor for Janeway and the crew. It was made obvious in the first season. It's funny how that was still an issue for Janeway to overcome by Latent Image, but that's what it means to be human. Despite the fact humanity overcame all of the previous issues and baggage, the universe will provide new challenges to your world view and it's very difficult to catch when you react poorly.
One could argue that the Doctor is a person who is made of software, and that editing his underlying software is equivalent to a medical procedure. Voluntary consent is relevant though if he is indeed a person.
It depends on if he's a sound mind to give consent. I would argue that he wasn't.
@@cordellshackelford4037 Good point...
EDIT: As I said before, I would give consent without a doubt.
I actually think that the fact she started off as eye candy makes Seven Of Nine MORE impressive!
I felt connected to her and the borg as an outsider trying to adapt and fit in. I love how she doesn't have to mask and just cuts to the chase it's awesome.
I liked the episode that she had multiple personalities come out it really showed her acting skills
...deleting human memories. Please tell me you have seen "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." It's Jim Carrey in one of his serious roles. If you've seen it, it definitely relates to the deletion of the Doctor's memories.
Or pc game "Remember Me"
@@aragonnetje Or in a bit of a twist on it, "To the Moon." Fantastic story.
Worf's brother got that treatment from Bashir.
if the memories are life-threatening, apparently it's ok to delete them & tell the person they've got amnesia (nobody will ever test his blood & find he's a son of Mogh during the dominion war)
@@PyrokineticFire1 The thing is, with Kurn, he not only agreed to the procedure (after some ... heavy handed convincing from Worf) but it was either do that to make the identity of Kurn "die" or wait for Kurn to actually kill himself, which would leave the station and its crew open to a number of legal and political problems. On top of that, Bashir still initially refused to do the procedure and basically had to be ordered by Sisko to perform it.
With the Doctor, the procedure was done to him without his consent; he wasn't even allowed to make an argument against it or to even prove that he could work past his traumatic guilt with counseling and none of the crew even second guessed the morality of it the first time around the same way Bashir did because their prejudice was that the Doctor wasn't alive and, thus, wasn't protected by Federation laws, and that kind of proves Steve's point - the Federation does have the technology to do to people what Janeway did to the Doctor, but it's seen as immoral and unethical to force such a procedure on a person even if doing so would ease their pain and make them more productive members of society. It's seen as more ethical and moral to let people suffer and make them get counseling than to simply erase the memories of what is causing them to suffer, unless that person is "just a machine", then it's okay.
Janeway's entire stance in that episode went completely against everything Starfleet stands for and the hard won battles of other characters like Data and Dr. McCoy that prove her wrong; Data's court martial in "Measure of a Man" should have set precedence for the Doctor's case by proving an artificial life form can be sentient, and McCoy's assertion in Star Trek V (I know, I know, but hear me out) that robbing a person of their pain robs them of their identity because it's our pain that defines who we are and dictates our actions. That last one is reaffirmed when Data requests to be deactivated in Generations as he can't let go of the guilt he's suffering from letting Geordi get captured and Picard tell him that dealing with negative emotions is part of having them; we can't simply remove bad memories to avoid negative emotions, we have to learn to live with them. The Doctor, by that point, had proven many times over that he was more than a simple program, that he was a sentient being with all of the complex emotional turmoil that comes with that. Granted, he may not have grown into that person when the first memory wipe had been ordered, so that time could have been justified as Janeway not realizing or recognizing the Doctor's personhood, but there was zero justification of her authorizing the same procedure a second time. If any other member of Voyager's crew was having trouble processing a similar trauma, Janeway wouldn't make the Doctor wipe their memories or force them into suspended animation, she'd (ironically) have them report to the Doctor for counseling or, in extreme cases like with Lon Suder, would turn to more unconventional means like a mind meld with a Vulcan as part of their rehabilitation.
Seven became a much more nuanced character than anyone could have expected.
Tom Hardy playing Picard on the Stargazer would just blow my mind! He is such a good actor and I think he could pull it off.
If Geordi is like Data's best friend, or Data's brother, Picard is like Data's *father* - and who wouldn't mourn a son who died before his time?
Sorry to say, Porthos died in a transporter accident when Scotty was trying to prove some sort of point.
I highly doubt that was Porthos, unless he somehow stayed alive for even 80 years, let alone 107 from when we first saw him to the time we meet Kelvin Scotty. We don't even know if he's referring to Jonathan Archer or a descendent of him. I kind of prefer it be a descendent, because I liked the idea of Archer ending his career as the third president of the UFP.
Naw... some Nausican just got a brand new dog. 🤣
That was in an alternate timeline, however, so it leaves things open in the pre-Nero split universe. ;)
It is one of the funnier elements of Kelvin Trek that Star Trek: Enterprise was the only series that remained completely canon to the timeline.
@@JonSmith-hk1bq Unless you consider the possibility that Star Trek: Enterprise was a skew from the Star Trek: First Contact time travel incident.
The thought that Seven was just eye candy literally never even crossed my mind, neither in the original run nor in the two decades since!
You innocent lil thing.
@@Krystalmyth =D
@@derpimusmaximus8815 =D
And how old were you on first watching?
I think Picard would have profoundly mourned the death of an of his bridge crew. He obviously admired Data. He was basically his prodigy.
I think about that it is possible to make no mistakes and still loose quote nearly on a daily basis. It is such a good life lesson.
I'm pretty confident that the reason 7/9 was so favored by the writers was that she got around the mandate that they make all the humans boring since she "technically counts as an alien".
Also: their use of the scorpion and the frog parable is just one more of their "we've never talked to a Native person and have done 0 research" racisms they did.
So because it has animals in it, it "sounds" like "spiritual" "Native" "American" to the white audience.
Now excuse me as I scream into the void in Kanienkeha'ka again.
Chakotay was basically "all natives mixed together" in his role. It is never clear where his ancestors come from. Sometimes he portrays someone from the amazon, then from the plains, but never really set his role besides being the "token native american" to portray how they have more than western culture in the Federation, totally overlooking that there are many very different cultures home to the americas.
@@HappyBeezerStudios not really helping matters was that the guy who they consulted wasn't even Native American to begin with.
The Frog And The Scorpion sounds like Aesop, not “spiritual” or “Native American”, at least to this White American.
Dude, Tapestry is one of my favorite stories from any piece of fiction. It really nailed the It's a Wonderful Life-style theme of what happens when you think about what you would do with a do-over--and actually shows the consequences of those actions. It's so easy to think, "Man, if I knew then what I knew now, I'd have done that completely differently," and believe that current wisdom in a past situation would've created a better scenario. But making mistakes, and the lessons we learn from those mistakes, can help _make_ us the person that has this greater wisdom, and without cutting our teeth in those scenarios, we lose a vital part of ourselves.
Q's brilliant soliloquy at the end really drives this home: " _Au contraire_ . That was the person you wanted to be--one who was less arrogant and undisciplined in his youth? One who was _less like me_ ? The Jean Luc Picard _you_ wanted to be, the one who did not fight the Nausican, had a very different career than the one you remember. That Picard never had a brush with death, never came face to face with his own mortality, never realized how fragile life is, or how important each moment must be. So his life never came into focus; he drifted for much of his career, no plan or agenda, moving from one assignment to the next, never seizing the opportunities that presented themselves. He never led the away team on Millica III to save the ambassador, or take charge of the Stargazer's bridge when its captain was killed, and no one ever offered him a command. He learned to _play it safe_ , and he _never, ever_ got noticed by _anyone_ ."
I was 9 years old when I watched that episode during its first run, and to this day, that last line still sticks with me whenever I'm at an impasse on whether or not to step up to the plate when shit gets rough. One of the most powerful speeches of all time.
Great logic: "Let's try and mitigate any harm Captain Janeway can do by promoting her and hoping she'll stay behind a desk where nobody can get hurt."
5 seconds after settling in....
Janeway: "I haven't had my coffee yet...
*COURT-MARTIAL MY ASSISTANT!"*
It's the Kirk situation. Only difference is, that Kirk got demoted after stealing the Enterprise, but under the circumstances that he saved the Earth while doing so, they left him in service because it's better having him out there causing trouble than not having him out there.
The Sisko situation: I'm going to punch you in the face
Appreciate the shout out! And I mean, I will definitely concede that the last "Quantum Leap" was a million times better then the last episode of "Enterprise". Given the choice, I would watch the last "QL" all day, every day.
Great stuff; I'm glad UA-cam recommended this channel a few months back. 👍
Star Trek: Stargazer would NECESSARILY cast Tom Hardy. Does anything else really need to be said in that regard?
Only if he does the Bain voice the whole time.
I could be interested in an anthology series that is too experimental for a network to green light. Each season follows a different year or period in Picard’s life, and he’s played by a different actor each season... kind of like that Bob Dylan flick, but not so disjointed bc we would follow each Picard for 8-12 episodes at a time.
He is way to buff for this now. When he played Shinzon in Nemesis he was not working out yet and became the beast he is now
I immediately thought of James McEvoy.
@@aspinninggreycube1270 Was just going to suggest him as alternate casting
If the doctor was just "software" how would he be traumatized? The trauma itself proves he is sentient and an individual person.
The problem is, you'd have no way of knowing if it was a real trauma or just a bug or an oversight in the EMH's programming that you just anthropomorphized as a trauma, because the doctor's programming was written to exhibit that kind of error in that way. It's a big question in philosophy if there ever can be a real, certain way to find out if even any other human (besides me*, of course, as I know it myself) has a conscience, a mind, or if all the other people are just biological machines that just mimic the reactions of a mind. But it becomes even muddier when you add AIs to that.
*) Everybody can of course place themselves to this pronoun. It's certain for each and every "me", but for others, can't be determined out for certain.
Exactly! The Doctor has such an astonishing arc: he begins as a mere function, a tool or instrument if you want to put it that way. And then he grows, develops and learns that he is a person, that he is more than the purpose he serves to the needs of others. Not dissimilar from Seven's arc, actually...maybe that's why I ship them?
@@synchronos1 "You'd have no way of knowing if it was a real trauma" - That's basically the "Philosophical Zombie" problem: Does an implementation of human actions (including expression of emotions) make you human? Or do you need to have that same internal experience? Do humans even have any real internal experience?
@@renerpho And this of course is the exact argument made on "The Measure of a Man," where Captain Louvois' closing statement mirrors the impossibility to distinguish the two in humans, and that we need to extend that same benefit of the doubt to artificial beings.
That's a faulty assumption, right up there with the belief that a deterministic system doesnt allow for sentience.
A computer program sufficiently complex as to near perfectly portray its self as human will no doubt have responses to irregular inputs that resemble trauma. In a Turing sense it could so resemble trauma as to effectively be trauma.
Non sentient animals experience trauma well.
Seven of Nine is not just a sexy science fiction character, she's an interesting character. Her arc in Voyager was: Readjusting to humanity.
Memes would demand James McAvoy playing a young Picard.
Oh my God, yes!
Hear me out for a second... this guy has the same connection, looks the part even more, and is way closer to the right age range: www.imdb.com/name/nm2875966
As someone who is both on the autism spectrum and transgender, I identified heavily with Seven, she's honestly one of my favorite characters in all of Star Trek, behind perhaps only Ezri and Jadzia Dax (and catch me on a different day and she may be above them). It's honestly why while I was excited to see Picard in Star Trek Picard, I was OVER THE MOON when I learned Jeri Ryan was returning.
Also, I also adore your Steve and Stuffy videos.
One way to incorporate the “Space, the final frontier” speech in a way that hopefully wouldn’t come off as rote repetition might be to suggest that it was part of Archer’s speech that gives at the charter-signing ceremony. Have Troi, in saying that she memorized the speech, quote a snippet. Or have Archer, as he’s writing it, ask Trip which sounds better: “the last frontier,” or “the final frontier”?
Maybe have it at the end of his speech, so he gives all his important bits, and when we comes to that part, it starts with Archer, then slowly fades into Kirk, then Picard.
And even the Drexler refit could have it's place. Have it on Archer's table when he leaves the room to give the speech. Just acknowledging that it exists without making it a big plot point.
That’s how I connected with Seven...the trauma survivor route...mostly since she seemed to block it out until it overwhelmed her (then had help to deal with it). I’ve done very similar things with trauma in my life, and it’s nice to be on the outside of that menace, watching how hard others help those they love when they see they are in pain of some sort
Thanks for highlighting my comment, Steve. You are correct that there are different sources of creative input on Voyager that affected how Seven of Nine was shaped.
That said, bringing out the comments about what Seven of Nine meant to people from various groups was very touching and much appreciated. Being part of a minority and on top of that being Jewish, I had a character that I could identify with from the start: Spock. Other people have had to wait longer to get that character who represented who they were or how they felt. There are more than a few of us who get carried with criticism that should remember that not every Star Trek is made for us.
Picard had Doctor Pulaski erase Sarjenka's memory at the end of Pen Pals. How is that different from Janeway erasing the Doctors memory?
If a human was experiencing what he was going through they would be considered to be lacking the mental capacity to make their own medical decisions and it would be the responsibility of their nok, Janeway would be the closest thing the Doctor had to a nok
Because erasing the memory of a member from a pre-warp society to prevent cultural contamination is vastly different from wiping a traumatic memory of a crewman so they do their job better.
What Janeway did to the Doctor isn't much different from what Sybok did to the inhabitants of Nimbus III; in both cases the victims were robbed of personality defining pain that all sentient species needs to drive them to be better people. McCoy (in Star Trek V) and Picard (In Star Trek Generations) both made impassioned speeches about that very topic and why the presence of negative emotions and the bad memories that cause them are necessary to living.
Is it fair to say Voyager failed as an absolute? The show ran 7 years and has a significant fan base.
I liked Voyager. Yes the 2nd and 3rd seasons dragged a little but they weren't horrible. They just needed some oomph. And yes the series finale was a bit lame and predictable. I still love the series faults and all. Yes Seven was a sex kitten but turned out to be much much more. And there's no need for anyone to apologize for that.
Eastlyn Burkholder starting with TNG and ending with voyager seven seasons waseen as the unofficial standard length of a Star Trek series. If Voyager were a complete failure I’d argue that it wouldn’t have gone on for seven seasons. That’s the only point I was making.
@@cashflowhustles I just felt terrible for Jeri Ryan for having to be in that outfit because from what I heard she had to have oxygen cannisters on standby.
voyager got me into star trek. however it was the least of the ones that went 7 years. but I only realized that after watching 14 other seasons of years. is it the best? no, but that was the producers fault. acting was good and writing was good.
The military has a tradition called, “failing upward.” Janeway fits that perfectly. 😀
One of my favorite moments from The Measure of a Man is the scene in the ready room where Picard is saying to Data "Perhaps you should let them go through with the procedure, it might turn out okay." and Data says "Geordi's VISOR is technically superior to natural human vision, right? Why doesn't Starfleet require all personnel to receive optic implants?" And Picard is like "oh shit this is about the individual's right to bodily autonomy" He dismisses Data to think a moment, then his stance has changed. He doesn't dig himself in, he realizes he is in error and changes his position. That is righteous.
Re: Fixing the doctor... WHY NOT JUST ASK HIS CONSENT?! That's the easiest solution to this issue.
Say it againfor the kids in the back! AMEN! :)
The Psycho Janeway theory still holds strong to this day. In fact, I can't wait to find out that in Picard, it's all Janeway's fault for the situation Picard finds himself in.
PJ: "Maddox, I got a great idea. I want you to make me some robo-daughters that I can unleash upon my foes!"
Maddox: "Uh, I'm not sure tha--"
PJ: "When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you! Or do you want me to feed you to my flying scorpions who hunger for ocular jelly?"
Captain Insaneway
I see you are also a fan of SF Debris interpretation of Janeway.
The cast of TNG never felt like true "friends". They were always so formal with each other even in their off hours playing poker. DS9 and DSC do a much better job straddling that formal/family line than TNG so I get the criticism about the Picard/Data friendship. In my head cannon the cast of TNG were close friends but that is never really seen on screen imo.
Man, I think it comes through on screen ALL THE TIME. From Worf offering Geordi dating advice in "Transfigurations" (Worf: "you must let her see the fire in your eyes!" Geordi: :open-mouthed stare: ) to Riker and Troi trading winks and smiles whenever Picard was flustered or embarrassed, to Riker and Guinan's flirting lesson for Wesley, to Beverly and Troi talking about sex that makes your toes curl, I always 100% felt the warmth and love these characters had for each other. Yeah, they're kind of formal. So what? People in costume dramas sound formal to us, too, but I would never suggest that, say, the Marches in Little Women don't love each other.
DS9 is a copy from Babylon 5
TheDreamtheaterlover quiet, you.
To the conservative comment I'm a conservative leaning libertarian. I've always been interested in Star Trek tangentially just as a sci fi fan. My primary "jumping off" series was TNG but after watching your videos I binged DS9 and love it! Not a die hard Trek fan but neither do I rail against some liberal agenda because similarly to what you've said Sci fi has ALWAYS been progressive and the best sci fi makes you think about where you stand on things while still being fun. Maybe you'll see this.and it'll help your video maybe you won't. Kinda looking forward to that video either way lol
My father, despite being conservative enjoyed DS9, but I have to say he watched it as much more of a cautionary tale... marginalized private business is kept in a place of being largely ineffectual and is lorded over by overzealous police, and that isn't just Quark and Odo. When the heroes need something of material value their only real choice is to barter or trade, which are traditional signs of a failed economic system. Also, how often in such a stateist world people run up against bureaucracy or laws that are inconvenient to the protagonists that ignore them and are let off the hook because of strings being pulled... or special favors being done. Many would call that corruption. I'm not saying those are necessarily conservative views, just how he read it.
@@slamapoop I can see some of that not necessarily how I take it but I don't really analyze things that closely unless someone points it out which is why I watch UA-camrs like Steve lol
@@Pilgrim_Gamer I am generalizing and painting in broad strokes, but he loved watching it and going "seeeee" the same way he would when he'd watch Rush Limbaugh and respond to some shining a light on "liberal hypocrisy" moments.
I think it’s more tan that, actually. It’s an oversimplification and kinda douchy to assert that conservatives are what Star Trek is out there to combat, and I guess if you close one eye and lie to yourself just right maybe you believe it. But Star Trek isn’t necessarily political, it’s hopeful. And it’s only self-righteous douche-baggery that makes it political. Comment on the show and we’ll stay. Keep calling us assholes and blaming us for what you don’t like in the world and we’ll probably still stay. Conservatives believe in free speech.
as someone who you'd consider on the left i get really annoyed when people on the left say things like what do conservatives get out of star trek.... as if conservatives are some sort of sub species... in an age where everyone sits in there own corner and anyone who doesn't think like them as a fascist, you'd think star trek fans (who probably think they are more enlightened) would know the answer... the same things you do, what a bizarre question??
I know a fair amount of conservatives who like Star Trek chief among them my own Dad and Uncle.
If I were to guess why Id say it's because they grew up watching it.
I like to think, or I suppose hope, because I doubt it actually happened all that often, is they watched for the spaceship fights and hot alien babes and the cool pew-pew 'plosions only, but that a few heard the messages and related and then realized that they were the ones holding us back and changed. I'm sure that it happened _some,_ bit I just doubt that it was often.
Kyle Butler I am a conservative that is a fan of Star Trek, every series I have seen so far has presented something I have both enjoyed and things I have not. I did growing up enjoying watching Star Trek with my father who watched the original series when he was young. If you aren’t certain why conservatives also enjoy Star Trek, that just says that you don’t speak to enough conservatives. I could give you a dozen reasons why I personally enjoy it, many I think you would agree with. But this post is already too long. You can message me if you’d like to talk further.
Kyle Butler I decided to post a list of 10 reasons why I like Star Trek on this comment thread. Maybe you’ll agree with some of them.
I know a number of conservatives who like Star Trek, especially the older series. They're very comfortable today with the social/moral stances that were progressive some 30-50 years ago, and less so with more current takes. In the same way, I loved TOS growing up but today find it cringingly regressive and even TNG looks like a world where too many social attitudes have stayed stagnant over hundreds of years.
Regarding "These Are the Voyages" I'm still trying to figure out what in that story was supposed to have given Riker insight into what he should do vis-a-vis the Pegasus. Troi knew the story and recommended he run it instead of just telling him the moral of the story, so it really would have been nice to see something in the episode, you know, be even slightly relevant to the situation Riker finds himself in. So not only does the episode tease the Archer Speech without giving it to us, but it also flakes out on the whole point of the story. If someone can point me to the place in that episode that makes Riker's intrusion into it make any kind of sense, I would appreciate it.
As for Chef, yes, Jeffrey Combs is an excellent choice for who to play that character. The only (arguably) better choice would be Isaac Hayes.
And for Porthos, put him on the USS Rainbow, where he spends most of his time on the bridge.
As someone who is still coming to terms their gender identity, can I just say, holy crap, that comment from Jane is deeply moving. That was such a great share. :)
For me, I guess I've been through something similar with Marina Sirtis/Counselor Troi. Although these days it's definitely the character of Jadzia Dax (played brilliantly by Terry Farrell) that I identify with.
The email from Jane at 8:25. I had never heard about Ms Ryan getting all that kind of response of how much she had meant to them. That does jive with what I’ve heard about the kind of mail that Mr Nimoy generated and received. One specific letter in Susan Sackett’s Letters to Star Trek came from a teacher who one year had a special needs kid in her classroom. The kid reacted to Spock and when he wanted to talk to her, he’d give her a drawing of Spock, alone on the bridge. He made some improvements over the year, but unfortunately got lost the next year. That letter has haunted me all these years. Clearly their status as others made huge impressions in these folks who needed them in their lives before the modern day when there is some help, in some places, for these people on various spectrums. That’s pretty huge.
Have you heard that the other Trek ‘other’ characters generated this kind of response--Data, Worf, Odo, or the modern ‘other’ characters? This is fascinating and I wish this could be studied. For anyone who ever Pooh-pooped all of Trek over the years as trash, all of these stories how the various characters inspired them like this or getting into science or engineering or what have you, clearly refutes these naysayers. Trek is clearly not just entertainment, but educational and inspirational far more than Roddenberry ever dreamed of over the years.
As Steve said, that "eye candy" got to become more of a a real person than any other character on the show. I think she even has the Doctor beat.
Nicely done as always Steve :)
However, I seem to remember that when the situation is explained to the doctor, he DOES agree wirh Janeway's desision and wants to undergo the memory erasure again, rather than leave the crew without a doctor.
Its only then that Janeway takes the option to do so away from him and says he has to face it.
I remember this as seeming to be Janeway's MO to be vindictive.
Honestly, if the doctor was a human being that also could be considered a cruel reprisal of his rights too, if there is an easy, repeatable proceedure to resolve a problem that occurs occasionally, and the person wants to undergo it, and the other option is to have them be a catatonic unproductive member of society for an indefinite period of time, would it be right to force them to take that option?
I'm not so sure.
Still its an old memory, at least 10 years, and I may have read it wrong in the remembering, but it stuck in my mind as kind of a dick move by Janeway, that did treat him more like property than a person, because it didn't matter what his opinion of doing the proceedure was, in fact she was happy to go against it to try a new Idea to fix a software bug that 7 suggested, in spite of it being against thw wishes of the EMH because it might save them time in dealing with the bug in the log run.
Either way I'm sure you'll let me know :)
I just love the Gold Key Comics style font of the "Trek Actually" logo, btw!
Thank you for speaking to my point, sir! Very much appreciated.
RE: eye candy
That was Kate Mulgrew’s criticism of replacing Jennifer Lien with Jeri Ryan. And why she was so frosty towards Jeri Ryan behind the scenes.
How sad for Kate and Jeri. I love them both.
20:12 “And you know who agrees with me, by the way? Jeri Ryan.” 😎
For people like me, who came for the title but who're interested in what the context: 17:25
I can see the *"fans"* now, "The Stargazer is to advanced." "Picard would never do that." "The writers don't know Trek or Gene's vision for Trek."
"What's with all the SJWs"
"UGH, woke Trek."
They would just need to cast James McAvoy to play the younger Picard. It worked for X-men First Class...
* ecstatic fan-flail and squeeeling *
Nah. Just get Patrick Stewart, the man doesn't age
Seriously, look him up in Dune...
I'm on the autism spectrum and I've noticed that every Trek series I've ever watched has a character that's coded autistic (or in the case of Discovery, one who actually is Autistic). The original series had Spock, next gen had Data, Voyager had Seven of Nine, and Deep Space Nine had Odo. Why do you think this is?
There is also this idea in popular culture -- you probably know better than I do how much truth is in it -- that people on the autism spectrum are more likely to be technologically inclined. So, since science fiction often revolves around advanced technology, perhaps people on the spectrum have always been a sort of "personality archetype" that sci-fi authors were aware of and drew inspiration from, even before autism was widely recognized as a specific type of neurodivergence.
I know you're asking Steve but allow me to chime in: I think Star Trek is a place that welcomes nonconformity and neurological and social-skills diversity is a part of that. Think about Reg Barclay. Think about how Spock has muted emotions because he's half Vulcan. Think about Data, who has no emotions. I think part of the story is that this is the writers selling their franchise to an audience they know will be diverse to begin with. Just my two cents!
14:15 - 15:25 You mean like Worf died to his brother?
Porthos on Alpha Centauri? You meant Sirius of course....
I'd love to see a Stargazer series from a lower decks perspective where we only see glimpses of young Picard. You could see the effects of him as a young captain without directly needing an actor to try & fill his shoes.
It would be good to see more Trek from the below deck perspective.
I have a Trek RPG that I have been thinking about running at some point for this kind of setting where the players are doing various things around the ship, getting into scrapes on shore leave, going on away missions, and only occasionally interacting with the senior staff and bridge crew.
"They couldn't leave her in charge of a starship!"
Yeah, about that, past-Steve...
To add to the "conservatives watch star trek" I myself was very religious and very conservative in my 20's. I grew up in a liberal household, so maybe that was my rebellion?? But I grew up watching and loving Star Trek and sci-fi and continued to do so in my 20's. Cognitive dissonance is a thing. I think what happens is (And I'm sure you made this comment in another video about Star Trek) the villains are "OVER THERE" we're all perfect here. Star Trek does this with the Federation. Everyone's perfect and they don't need fixing, it's all these outsiders. And as a viewer. you relate that to yourself.
Good Trek and Sci-Fi though should be attractive to liberal and conservative alike and should actually challenge our beliefs and held worldviews. Or at the very least plant the seeds that lead to change later.
I eventually broke my dissonance and stopped believing in imaginary sky people. And I believe those seeds were planted with all my exposure to sci-fi as a kid. Particularly Trek. Some get there quickly, some slowly and some just never get there.... it just is.
That being said, were there moral lessons in Voyage :p
Theres the possibility of observer bias also, I distinctly recall a trek fan who adamantly believed the entire franchise up to that point (late TNG era) was clearly showing white supremacy as the way of the future. Sure there were foreigners and black people but they were all subservient to Kirk's epitomized whiteness and even supposedly shown to be morally inferior.
@@DrewLSsix Wow, how to take one of the most progressive shows of its age and turn it around to make it sound like the opposite. That takes some extreme delusion, this person you speak of sounds like a very deranged character.
Point on "Latent Image": couldn't you argue that, while the Doctor has all the rights etc. of a person, that it is still ethical to treat a person against their will if they are no longer mentally competent to make such decisions for themselves? And that Janeway, as the captain, has by default, power of attorney if a crewmember is unable to give informed consent. I'm not saying the _episode_ makes that point, but maybe the episode would have been better if it _had_ made that point.
Or had been made in say, Season 1, when they still called the Doctor "it"...just sayin'...
I'd say that goes too close to real life situations, like "sectioning" in the UK (to refer to the "section" of the law that allows detaining and treating without consent) which has a hell of a lot of abuse or flimsy justification. You're essentially saying that even in Steve's "what if he was human and there was this operation that would make him forget something traumatic" situation that it would be the right thing to do, aren't you?
@@kaitlyn__L Well true, I was mostly saying that it would have made a more interesting episode if that were the conflict, rather than just "he's a toaster/no he's not".
@@MagnusSkiptonLLC ah right, I see
And later on we see his series of EMH working as slaves in mines. The Federation clearly doesn't see holograms as the same. Unlike Data who got all the rights in court.
Oh, and the doctor even got a holomatrix transplantation at one point.
“Get a good look.”
BRILLIANT!!
Just wanted to say that I personally loved that Seven of Nine video because you proved how Jeri overcame what, I assumed everyone in the fandom (and some even outside of it), already knew about the introduction of that character... sexy woman in skin-tight catsuit to get more ratings. It’s been generally documented. Kudos to you for your brilliant videos in general but especially for that Seven video.
Not seeing Chef on screen is rather like all of Morn’s appearances without speaking. I liked Morn and adored his episode. Very much an example of how DS9 broke the mold of making a series; he was just as much a background character as TOS’ Lt. Leslie.
"Picard always seems calm and level-headed..."
"YoU HavE CoMmITteD aN AcT oF UTteR BaRbaRItY!!"
That was a response that was calm and level-headed compared to the provocation. Another captain would be shooting already.
On NCIS: New Orleans - I've watched the first few episodes, and while I can appreciate what the show does, it's my least favourite of any series in the franchise, so I didn't stick with it. I kind of want to go back and watch it sometime, but have been in no hurry to do so.
Scott Bakula only acts like Scott Bakula. Archer, Sam and the NCIS:NO "characters" are all Scott Bakula.....OR...... Everything we have seen is a continuation of Quantum Leap....
It's so touching that you are so grateful to hear perspectives of people with different live experiences and different takes.
Thanks for noticing me, Steve!
36:25 I honestly think the novels had a good blueprint for handling the Romulan War, so that's why I suggested it.
Re: Porthos
You're a very bad, but hilarious, person.
Well, at least he didn't promote Porthos to Ambassador to the Kreetasans.
Only Star Trek the movie split that timeline, not overwriting it.
Live long and prosper, Porthos. And now I wish someone (insert subtle hint) would do a podcast or series titled Chef's Log.
The thing is, and this is just my interpretation, Picard never had a kid...and in some ways I think the relationship between them was almost less friends and more a father/son dynamic, or if you want a teacher/student one. It's one thing I kind of liked with that show is you can kind of see that relationship grow over time, to where in First Contact and Nemesis (any issues with those movies aside) the relationship feels kind of like the child has grown up. You see hints of it in the show, like when they discuss data's rights and Data schools Picard using Geordie's eyes. Or when he discusses acting techniques around Prospero's ritual and how he's adjusted the method to fit his own aims and Picard seems...proud? Impressed?
It is like a dad proudly watching his son cross the rubikon and become a true equal or surpass emotionally and intellectually the dad...their relationship may not have been "close friends" like Geordie and Data, but was it less close? I don't really see that...
my sister told me at one point that Seven of Nine helped her realize she was a lesbian, which I found ironic because if the last episode of S1 of Picard is anything to go by, so is Seven.
20:19
Holy shit. Senpai noticed you.
When talking about erasing the Doctor's memories without his consent, you draw the comparison of doing it to a flesh and blood person and that no one would question it being wrong then. Except Star Trek does that too, on multiple occasions (or at least tries to). The Mintakan in the TNG episode "Who Watches the Watchers" being the main example that I can think of off the top of my head, but I know there have been other instances (I think Dr. Crusher even mentions in the episode that Dr. Polaski did it once). Discussing Star Trek's position on mind/memory tampering might actually be a good topic for an actual "Trek Actually".
Hey, Steve. I'm a self-identified political conservative, and yes: I do love Star Trek! In addition, I love your videos, not in spite of the fact that you tell me to "fuck off," but because of it.
Star Trek has always been a cerebral Sci-Fi show, it challenges you to properly think about the situations the characters are put in--especially when those situations have modern-day political parallels. You, here on the channel, do the same thing. You constantly challenge my view of Trek, forcing me to either alter my position or defend it. Either way, I become a stronger Trek fan because of it.
Thanks for featuring my comment Steve! I'm humbled you'd include my ramblings 😊
And while we don't agree about Archer's speech, I think we can agree that the final episode of Enterprise is full of many many missed opportunities
I've seen Latent Image several times and I've always been on Seven of Nine's side. But after hearing your argument and the counter argument I've actually had a change of heart. The doctor is a person made out of light and computer code instead of flesh and blood. Because of that he does not suffer from traditional illnesses and injuries. But he can fall victim to system errors and his program can be corrupted. Usually when this happens his program isn't in immediate danger and he can go to his "doctor", and request or reject treatment. This happens in most episodes where the doctor's program has been compromised in some way.
This particular scenario is more akin to a victim of head injury being carted into the ER. The patient is either unconscious or delirious and irrational and is clearly unfit to make his own decisions. Unfortunately, the head trauma is severe. The patient's brain is beginning to swell and action must be taken or the patient will die within minutes. So the doctor does the procedure & saves the patient's life. This is how I feel the original incident went down. The realization that he decided who lived and who died based solely on their level of friendship caused a major system error that made him mentally unfit and put his life in immediate danger. With no other options they performed the procedure to save his life. Of course things get a little messy when you realize that part of the ongoing treatment is not telling the patient that they had a procedure because if you do the same trauma will reoccur. And of course because Seven has to be right it turns out that the procedure wasn't needed in the first place. But what if it was needed? What if he had died of this system error While Janeway watched on unable to make a move because she hadn't gotten his consent yet? And of course Janeway tries to rationalize it by comparing him to a replicator. It's a hard decision to make and that's just typical emotionally repressed Janeway speaking. As well as typical Starfleet bigotry towards Holograms. Starfleet captains have been ignoring clearly sentient Holograms since way back in the Next Generation. (RIP Moriarty).
Very long story short, I believe that Janeway made a decision in the patient's best interest the same way any doctor would under similar circumstances and doing nothing would be tantamount to letting a patient bleed out on the table.
LOL I doubt he'll respond to a comment this long. Congrats to anyone who made it this far.
Worf's brother Kern got deneuralized.
he couldn't handle the dishonor that Worf accepted. developed a death wish & then they realized the only way to save his life was erase the memory of dishonor & help him get a fresh start
And Data, who was given all the rights of a personhood despite not being from flesh and blood.
I'm inclined to agree. So much of this episode is framed as though the Doctor's rights of personhood are the deciding factor in Janeway's choices, but that concept of informed consent is much more pertinent.
The Doctor is a person, that much is true, but he's a person made of emitters and subroutines, not flesh and synapses. When one of his subroutines threatens to destroy him imminently in an emergency, it also damages his ability to give informed and rational consent to any suggestion made by the rest of the crew. We see him unable to function on a basic level, let alone make complicated medical or personal decisions; a flesh and blood person in that position would probably have their medical consents performed by a separate person. Why would the doctor not be eligible to have his techno-medical decisions made by a trusted third party if he couldn't make them himself?
I reckon the morality play aspects of this episode would have been much stronger if they'd focused on the consent and medical advocacy angle, rather than rehashing the personhood argument from TNG's Measure Of A Man. Perhaps the argument could be about who is best suited to advocate for the doctor's needs, and there could be some consequences for Janeway not establishing an advocate for the doctor after the initial subroutine conflict, or even before that happened.
you should’ve seen my face when i got mentioned ^^ :D you are by far my most favorite star trek youtuber. i subscribed because of your Star Trek videos but stayed because all your videos are awesome :]
Same!
Regarding the "how is reprogramming the doctor different from ordering a crew member into a lethal situation" point, which I love not because I agree with it but because it is a great way to approach the question: Starfleet officers sign up for a dangerous job, and may be put at risk of dying in the line of duty, but that does not mean that their lives are purely disposable, or that their personhood can be endangered in the same way, ethically. I'd use, as a counterexample, Picard's decision in the TNG episode "Where Silence Has Lease" to destroy the Enterprise rather than sacrifice some portion of his crew to alien experimentation. Sure, he could sacrifice some to save many, but the *commodification* of his people, the literal renunciation of their personhood in order to save the rest, was anathema to him and to Riker, so they set self-destruct. Better that they all die together then to cheapen all of their lives in such a hideous exchange.
I think Seven felt, but never articulated, that core message: if the lives of persons (taking the stance the the Doctor is a *person*) are nothing more than tools to be used in preserving the whole, than the whole itself has no value. A particularly poignant stance for a former Borg to take, no?
Hey Steve, the term youre looking for is 'born sexy yesterday". I can recommend pop culture detective's video on the subject.
Wiping out a person's memory for the greater good is ABSOLUTELY something Starfleet would do. Remember Sarjenka from "Pen Pals"? 🙁
Oh yeah. Forgot about her. Kinda’ the equivalent of ECT - especially as it was used in 50’s. That episode always made me a little sad.
Re: Latent Image. The Doctor was emerging into sentience. It is simply not ethical to deny him a choice in the matter.
Agree, but on the other hand, if you had the chance to erase traumatic memories with no consequences and go on with your life as if they were never there, would you refuse this chance? Would you deny your consent? I would certainly not.
Go with the scorpion and the monk, instead.
"Yeah, it's the scorpion's nature to be an asshole. It's my nature to help him anyway"
Hello , what are Your thoughts of "Space : 1999 " , I like it as it's from My childhood , and wrote a follow up series , as best I could as I was never trained , would You have any ideas where to submit it ? If You do , please get in touch with me . I need some ideas . Thanks !
When it comes to conservatives liking Star Trek, one of the weirdest things for me as a tabletop gaming fan was realising that one of the big name fans who ran one of the fansites for the old FASA Star Trek space combat game was in fact also one of the guys running the Sad Puppies campaign to hijack the Hugo Awards. And he apparently cited Star Trek as a perfect example of 'apolitical' science fiction.
I feel like conservatives don't actually understand or comprehend the political messages in media they consume.
*Goes on about how stupid it is that people are complaining about Picard missing Data*
Ahh, did you see that RLM review too then?:p
Right? Like Picard mourned Tasha Yar and felt horribly guilty about how Sela came to be. Come on, guys.
@JohnnyTheWolf yes..yes they do. For good reason
Janeway is no stranger to deciding on other people's fates. She did the same thing in 'Nothing Human', going against B'Elanna's wishes and using the research of the Cardassian war criminal to save her. In that same episode she tells the Doctor that he is the chief medical officer, and it is his decision whether to delete the Cardassian's research or not. It seems clear that she will do whatever she thinks is right, and best for the ship and crew, without regard for personal or individual rights.
28:10 to add to all the good points that would speak for a Stargazer show, I would also like to see, there is still Tom Hardy actively acting and now an even bigger name who could take up the role of Picard after playing Shinzon. This even would boost Nemesis when you watch it after this show again if they would cast the same actor here...