RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,466
Posts: 5,508,960
Members: 25,133
Currently online: 503
Newest member: laibcoms

TrekToday headlines

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 2 2014, 06:59 PM   #31
desfem79
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

I guess it's deceiving the Romulans which is the point, but then even though two wrongs dont' make a right, if the Romulans were fighting the Founders and were losing after a few bad defeats, they'd most likely stage the killing of some Starfleet Admiral to get the UFP to declare war. hell, Garak himself said the same thing. lol.
desfem79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2 2014, 07:10 PM   #32
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

@sonak: Especially since he believed, and with good reason, that the Rommies would be forced to fight the Dominion eventually, and would indeed be better off in the long run if they joined the UFP's coalition. It's technically a dillema, yes, but it's also a pretty easy one. As I said in a previous thread on this, I gotta agree with Michelle Erica Green on this one:
I must say that I think the flashback-via-diary structure for this episode was a mistake, because I had a really hard time not laughing at Avery Brooks' earnest, emotional monologues in Sisko's personal logs.

.... I have to believe Sisko was upset because Garak was a cleverer saboteur than he was himself, not because he played nasty. If he was really feeling guilty about the dead enemy agent and the man the Klingons were going to execute anyway, his skin isn't nearly tough enough for him to be a captain during wartime. Garak wasn't even amoral in this episode as he so often is - his decisions were quite effective as he plotted to get the maximum Federation protection with the fewest lives lost. I thought the twist at the end was going to be that he was up to something far more personal and nefarious, not that he was trying to shoulder the responsibility for something he thought Sisko might not want to do himself.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2 2014, 07:29 PM   #33
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

^I feel that this is another moment in which Ms. Greene misses the mark: the more that Garak's independent actions became both surprising and nefarious, the more leeway Sisko would have to see them not as something for which he was responsible. He would have passed it off as being double-crossed by Garak. No, Garak's actions were of the right dimension so that Sisko should have legitimately felt responsible.
Bad Thoughts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 2 2014, 08:00 PM   #34
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

Gaith wrote: View Post
@sonak: Especially since he believed, and with good reason, that the Rommies would be forced to fight the Dominion eventually, and would indeed be better off in the long run if they joined the UFP's coalition. It's technically a dillema, yes, but it's also a pretty easy one. As I said in a previous thread on this, I gotta agree with Michelle Erica Green on this one:
I must say that I think the flashback-via-diary structure for this episode was a mistake, because I had a really hard time not laughing at Avery Brooks' earnest, emotional monologues in Sisko's personal logs.

.... I have to believe Sisko was upset because Garak was a cleverer saboteur than he was himself, not because he played nasty. If he was really feeling guilty about the dead enemy agent and the man the Klingons were going to execute anyway, his skin isn't nearly tough enough for him to be a captain during wartime. Garak wasn't even amoral in this episode as he so often is - his decisions were quite effective as he plotted to get the maximum Federation protection with the fewest lives lost. I thought the twist at the end was going to be that he was up to something far more personal and nefarious, not that he was trying to shoulder the responsibility for something he thought Sisko might not want to do himself.

thanks for including that. I agree with the author 100%.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 4 2014, 07:42 PM   #35
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

^ Anytime.

Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
I feel that this is another moment in which Ms. Green misses the mark: the more that Garak's independent actions became both surprising and nefarious, the more leeway Sisko would have to see them not as something for which he was responsible. He would have passed it off as being double-crossed by Garak. No, Garak's actions were of the right dimension so that Sisko should have legitimately felt responsible.
But Sisko would still have been responsible for enabling Garak's misdeeds in such a scenario.

Anyway, Green's main point, IMO, is the choice is an easy one. For good or for ill, a wartime ship/station CO shouldn't hesitate to potentially sacrifice three or four foreign civilians to save millions of his own. In light of Sisko's histrionic agonizing, "ItPM" isn't nearly as mature as many make it out to be. One could very well argue that it's in fact far more naive about humanity than just about any non-DS9 ep.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 4 2014, 09:40 PM   #36
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

Gaith wrote: View Post
^ Anytime.

Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
I feel that this is another moment in which Ms. Green misses the mark: the more that Garak's independent actions became both surprising and nefarious, the more leeway Sisko would have to see them not as something for which he was responsible. He would have passed it off as being double-crossed by Garak. No, Garak's actions were of the right dimension so that Sisko should have legitimately felt responsible.
But Sisko would still have been responsible for enabling Garak's misdeeds in such a scenario.

Anyway, Green's main point, IMO, is the choice is an easy one. For good or for ill, a wartime ship/station CO shouldn't hesitate to potentially sacrifice three or four foreign civilians to save millions of his own. In light of Sisko's histrionic agonizing, "ItPM" isn't nearly as mature as many make it out to be. One could very well argue that it's in fact far more naive about humanity than just about any non-DS9 ep.

historically, you could argue that during major wars just about every democracy has done far worse things than what Sisko did in ITPM.

Just to give U.S. examples: suspension of habeas corpus, jailing those who spoke out against a war or sought to avoid conscription, conscription itself, jailing American citizens of Japanese dissent, etc. etc.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 06:13 PM   #37
Xzpezer
Lieutenant
 
Location: united kindom
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

One of the best and darkest star trek episodes ever made/
Xzpezer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 08:58 PM   #38
Marc Voorhees
Ensign
 
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

A bit of a question, regarding the ease at which the Holo-recording was identified as a fake.

Damar was made Legate in or around "Statistical Probabilities" roughly 6 episodes before this one. However, when making the holo-recording. Damar, who was the first legate to follow Dukat as the leader of the Cardassian Union, was not wearing the badge of his office and rather the Officer sitting behind him at the table was. This has always been something that bothered me about the plan they tried to pull off.




Thanks for a great forum all!
Marc Voorhees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 10:51 PM   #39
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

sonak wrote: View Post
Gaith wrote: View Post
^ Anytime.

Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
I feel that this is another moment in which Ms. Green misses the mark: the more that Garak's independent actions became both surprising and nefarious, the more leeway Sisko would have to see them not as something for which he was responsible. He would have passed it off as being double-crossed by Garak. No, Garak's actions were of the right dimension so that Sisko should have legitimately felt responsible.
But Sisko would still have been responsible for enabling Garak's misdeeds in such a scenario.

Anyway, Green's main point, IMO, is the choice is an easy one. For good or for ill, a wartime ship/station CO shouldn't hesitate to potentially sacrifice three or four foreign civilians to save millions of his own. In light of Sisko's histrionic agonizing, "ItPM" isn't nearly as mature as many make it out to be. One could very well argue that it's in fact far more naive about humanity than just about any non-DS9 ep.

historically, you could argue that during major wars just about every democracy has done far worse things than what Sisko did in ITPM.

Just to give U.S. examples: suspension of habeas corpus, jailing those who spoke out against a war or sought to avoid conscription, conscription itself, jailing American citizens of Japanese dissent, etc. etc.
The episode does not address raison d'Útat in and of itself: the Federation's involvement in the fabrication is not really explored, and indeed, we are told that Starfleet approved of the plan in general. What the episode deals with is the relationship between raison d'Útat and civil ethics. This is a particularly messy topic when dealing with democratic societies, and even though a list of antidemocratic policies can be made, it can equally be said that the public could react negatively to them. Over the last thirteen years, things like the invasion of Iraq, the use of drones, and surveillance of personal communications have been questioned by the public in terms of whether the imperatives of war justifies them. There is potential for the pendulum to swing both ways, accepting something because of war one moment, criticizing the behavior of the government in another.

Ms. Green greatly mischaracterizes Garak. Is he amoral? That's an exaggeration. Whereas he would complete the assignments given to him--to do his duty--he is not generally violent, nor does he relish in inflicting violence, nor does he find opportunities to take advantage of people. He is professional: he is precise, and he is proud of being able to produce a specific effect. He never kills or tortures out of pleasure. Indeed, the one time he would seem to step outside his professionalism, when he interrogates Odo, he takes no pleasure. It is impossible to believe that he would not carefully measure his actions and their potential results. How far would he go to bring the Romulans into the war? Green doesn't give a counterexample of something believable. Would he poison a Romulan colony and plant evidence? That would be unbelievable. He is not that random or messy in his work. Moreover, his "betrayal" is really only effective because, as Garak puts it, it is something Sisko would have wanted to do. Sisko does not contradict what he says here: he was disarmed by it. If Garak had done something more outrageous, he could not in that moment implicate Sisko in the same way.
Bad Thoughts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 6 2014, 02:11 AM   #40
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Gaith wrote: View Post
^ Anytime.

But Sisko would still have been responsible for enabling Garak's misdeeds in such a scenario.

Anyway, Green's main point, IMO, is the choice is an easy one. For good or for ill, a wartime ship/station CO shouldn't hesitate to potentially sacrifice three or four foreign civilians to save millions of his own. In light of Sisko's histrionic agonizing, "ItPM" isn't nearly as mature as many make it out to be. One could very well argue that it's in fact far more naive about humanity than just about any non-DS9 ep.

historically, you could argue that during major wars just about every democracy has done far worse things than what Sisko did in ITPM.

Just to give U.S. examples: suspension of habeas corpus, jailing those who spoke out against a war or sought to avoid conscription, conscription itself, jailing American citizens of Japanese dissent, etc. etc.
The episode does not address raison d'Útat in and of itself: the Federation's involvement in the fabrication is not really explored, and indeed, we are told that Starfleet approved of the plan in general. What the episode deals with is the relationship between raison d'Útat and civil ethics. This is a particularly messy topic when dealing with democratic societies, and even though a list of antidemocratic policies can be made, it can equally be said that the public could react negatively to them. Over the last thirteen years, things like the invasion of Iraq, the use of drones, and surveillance of personal communications have been questioned by the public in terms of whether the imperatives of war justifies them. There is potential for the pendulum to swing both ways, accepting something because of war one moment, criticizing the behavior of the government in another.

Ms. Green greatly mischaracterizes Garak. Is he amoral? That's an exaggeration. Whereas he would complete the assignments given to him--to do his duty--he is not generally violent, nor does he relish in inflicting violence, nor does he find opportunities to take advantage of people. He is professional: he is precise, and he is proud of being able to produce a specific effect. He never kills or tortures out of pleasure. Indeed, the one time he would seem to step outside his professionalism, when he interrogates Odo, he takes no pleasure. It is impossible to believe that he would not carefully measure his actions and their potential results. How far would he go to bring the Romulans into the war? Green doesn't give a counterexample of something believable. Would he poison a Romulan colony and plant evidence? That would be unbelievable. He is not that random or messy in his work. Moreover, his "betrayal" is really only effective because, as Garak puts it, it is something Sisko would have wanted to do. Sisko does not contradict what he says here: he was disarmed by it. If Garak had done something more outrageous, he could not in that moment implicate Sisko in the same way.

No, I think that "amoral" describes Garak pretty well. "Amoral" doesn't mean that he has to enjoy cruelty or deliberately inflict pain for his own amusement. It means that he acts out of an agenda(either self-interest or in what he defines as the interests of Cardassia) without regard to ethics and right and wrong.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 04:41 AM   #41
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
Moreover, his "betrayal" is really only effective because, as Garak puts it, it is something Sisko would have wanted to do. Sisko does not contradict what he says here: he was disarmed by it. If Garak had done something more outrageous, he could not in that moment implicate Sisko in the same way.
But, again, as Green says, that's exactly the problem: he didn't tell Sisko beforehand for fear he'd stop him or at the very least whine and whinge to his face even more than he did anyhow. When Vreenak boarded his vessel and headed for home, Sisko himself should have approached Garak and asked about extreme fallback plans. War is war.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2014, 04:58 AM   #42
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees
Re: "In the Pale Moonlight'

Gaith wrote: View Post
Bad Thoughts wrote: View Post
Moreover, his "betrayal" is really only effective because, as Garak puts it, it is something Sisko would have wanted to do. Sisko does not contradict what he says here: he was disarmed by it. If Garak had done something more outrageous, he could not in that moment implicate Sisko in the same way.
But, again, as Green says, that's exactly the problem: he didn't tell Sisko beforehand for fear he'd stop him or at the very least whine and whinge to his face even more than he did anyhow. When Vreenak boarded his vessel and headed for home, Sisko himself should have approached Garak and asked about extreme fallback plans. War is war.
If Sisko disagreed with Garak that he did what Sisko would have wanted, Sisko should have continued to kick the crap out of Garak. Instead, it was a denouement. Sisko knew that he had been exposed.
Bad Thoughts is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.