Let's talk about the elephant in the room, this series violates Roddenberry's vision big time

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Ahhh, the "Well technically it doesn't violate canon if you put this particular interpretation on words and events".

That's absolutely the best kind of sticking to canon that there is.

It's certainly Spock's characteristically preferred approach. Just a few examples, by no means an exhaustive list...

"What Are Little Girls Made Of?" (TOS):

CHAPEL: Have you ever been engaged, Mister Spock?
SPOCK: [raises eyebrow, doesn't answer]

"Amok Time" (TOS):

KIRK: Marriage party? You said T'Pring was your wife.
SPOCK: By our parents' arrangement. A ceremony while we were but seven years of age. Less than a marriage but more than a betrothal.

(Earlier in same episode...)

SPOCK: I wish to take my leave on Vulcan.
KIRK: Spock, I'm asking you. What's wrong?
SPOCK: I need...rest. I'm asking you to accept that answer.

[...]

MCCOY: There's a growing imbalance of body functions, as if in our bodies huge amounts of adrenaline were constantly being pumped into our bloodstreams. Now, I can't trace it down in my biocomps. Spock won't tell me what it is. But if it isn't stopped somehow, the physical and emotional pressures will simply kill him.
KIRK: You say you're convinced he knows what it is?
MCCOY: He does, and he's as tight-lipped about it as an Aldebaran shellmouth. No use to ask him, Jim. He won't talk.

(Kirk has to issue him a direct order to get him to explain about pon farr.)


"The Enterprise Incident" (TOS):

ROMULAN COMMANDER: There's a well-known saying, or is it a myth, that Vulcans are incapable of lying?
SPOCK: It is no myth.
ROMULAN COMMANDER: Then tell me truthfully now, by your honor as a Vulcan, what was your mission?
SPOCK: I reserve the privilege of speaking only when it will not violate my honor as a Vulcan.
ROMULAN COMMANDER: It is unworthy of a Vulcan to resort to subterfuge.
SPOCK: You're being clever, Commander. That is unworthy of a Romulan. It is not a lie to keep the truth to oneself.

(And of course, the entire operation turns out to have been one deception after another strung together, all along!)


Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan:

SAAVIK: You lied!
SPOCK: I exaggerated.


Star Trek V: The Final Frontier:

KIRK: Sybok couldn't possibly be your brother, because I happen to know for a fact that you don't have a brother!
SPOCK: Technically, you are correct. I do not have a brother.
KIRK: There, you see?
SPOCK: I have a half-brother.


Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country:

SPOCK: Very well. For twenty-four hours we'll agree this conversation did not take place.
VALERIS: A lie?
SPOCK: An omission.

[...]

SPOCK: Valeris, please inform Starfleet Command our warp drive is inoperative.
VALERIS: A lie?
SPOCK: An error.



-MMoM

 

[fireproof78]

So what if it has been done in Star Trek before, it is the plot aspect not the writers tool kit that is the basis of the comment that Michael has gotten away with something. She would still have gotten away with something if every character in every Star Trek also had. I found the same reference Mighty Monkey did regards Lorca and also where he says he was given discretion to use whatever means to fight the war. Even the intro pieces of later episodes referenced Lorca extending her an invitation to join the crew. The reference to official deferment I might have to ask you for that. Beyond that she has it pretty cushy.

"Getting away with" is a phrase that implies she will never get a punishment. That is not what I see being the case. That's about it for me.

You take it however you will.

 

[Ovation]

Deferred doesn't mean she won't serve it. Just that a larger issue took precedence. This has been done in Star Trek before.

It’s been done in real life before.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

There can never be any punishment as great as her own guilt and remorse over the loss of all those who continue to die in the war she failed to avert, and most especially that of Georgiou.

Lorca is absolutely right that leaving her in prison would be nothing but a further waste of resources.

 

[Graham]

It's certainly Spock's characteristically preferred approach. Just a few examples, by no means an exhaustive list...

"What Are Little Girls Made Of?" (TOS):

CHAPEL: Have you ever been engaged, Mister Spock?
SPOCK: [raises eyebrow, doesn't answer]

...and? She asks him a question, he doesn't answer... and so...?

"Amok Time" (TOS):

KIRK: Marriage party? You said T'Pring was your wife.
SPOCK: By our parents' arrangement. A ceremony while we were but seven years of age. Less than a marriage but more than a betrothal.

(Earlier in same episode...)

SPOCK: I wish to take my leave on Vulcan.
KIRK: Spock, I'm asking you. What's wrong?
SPOCK: I need...rest. I'm asking you to accept that answer.

I'm really not sure what it is you're listing here. Spock doesn't want to answer him, so he says he needs rest - which he clearly does - and asks him to accept that without further explanation. What does any of this have to do with Spock's approach to canon? How does Spock even have an approach to canon, given that he's a character rather than, say, a writer or producer?

ROMULAN COMMANDER:

There's a well-known saying, or is it a myth, that Vulcans are incapable of lying?
SPOCK: It is no myth.

Yes. Are you unaware of the in-universe irony that the saying 'Vulcans never lie' is, in fact, a lie?

Incidentally, you missed one of the best ones. From "A Taste Of Armageddon".

Spock : "Sir, there's a multi-legged creature crawling on your shoulder."

But again, I'm not sure what any of this has to do with a comment about the best approach to canon.

The idea of "we can violate the spirit of canon whilst doing the bare minimum to stick within the strictest possible interpretation of the words" is a bit of a bugbear of mine. It's why we got Borg and Ferengi in Enterprise on the grounds that "well they didn't say who they are so it doesn't technically count as a violation."

Nuts to that, IMO. But your mileage may vary, of course.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

^The point is that Spock as a character has never been portrayed as having any qualm whatsoever about exploiting a technicality in order to withhold a piece of information he doesn't wish to divulge. Quite the opposite, he exhibits a repeated pattern of doing exactly that. Thus, provided Burnham's conviction is reversed/expunged within the next decade, this bit from "The Tholian Web" (TOS) is violated neither in letter nor in spirit, and in turn violates nothing itself:

CHEKOV: Has there ever been a mutiny on a starship before?
SPOCK: Absolutely no record of such an occurrence, Ensign.

-MMoM

 

[The Wormhole]

What was there to defend? She attacked her Captain, took command, and wanted to fire first. She is sitting pretty now having gotten away with everything.

All she really did was pinch her Captain's neck, knocking her out for a few minutes and tried to take command in those few minutes, and she's stripped of rank and sentenced to life in prison. Now compare that to Lorca, who murdered his own crew, and admitted to that in his official report. That's an action that should have resulted in him being stripped of rank and sentenced to life in prison, but instead, he keeps his rank and is given not just another command, but command of Starfleet's most important asset.

If murdering your own crew is defensible in this Starfleet, so should neck-pinching your CO.

 

[Refuge]

All she really did was pinch her Captain's neck, knocking her out for a few minutes and tried to take command in those few minutes, and she's stripped of rank and sentenced to life in prison. Now compare that to Lorca, who murdered his own crew, and admitted to that in his official report. That's an action that should have resulted in him being stripped of rank and sentenced to life in prison, but instead, he keeps his rank and is given not just another command, but command of Starfleet's most important asset.

If murdering your own crew is defensible in this Starfleet, so should neck-pinching your CO.

Oh I think the Lorca thing is a travesty as well It's a dog eat dog future in Discovery.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh I think the Lorca thing is a travesty as well It's a dog eat dog future in Discovery.

Inter arma enim silent leges

 

[Refuge]

There can never be any punishment as great as her own guilt and remorse over the loss of all those who continue to die in the war she failed to avert, and most especially that of Georgiou.

Lorca is absolutely right that leaving her in prison would be nothing but a further waste of resources.

That actually would make for an interesting debate topic. If a criminal has potential uses in society should they get to escape justice a lesser 'qualified' law breaker would not?

 

[Graham]

^The point is that Spock as a character has never been portrayed as being above exploiting a technicality in order to withhold a piece of information he doesn't wish to divulge. Quite the opposite, he exhibits a repeated pattern of doing exactly that. Thus, provided Burnham's conviction is reversed/expunged within the next decade, this bit from "The Tholian Web" (TOS) is violated neither in letter nor in spirit, and in turn violates nothing itself:

CHEKOV: Has there ever been a mutiny on a starship before?
SPOCK: Absolutely no record of such an occurrence, Ensign.

-MMoM

Not sure I really accept the "it's happened before so it's okay" argument. I mean, Spock mind-raped Valeris in ST VI. Does that mean it would be fine if the writers of Discovery decided that Spock would be a habitual mind-rapist who just loved to go around mind raping the ladies? Of course not.

And in any case, it would be an absurd lie to tell. Spock generally lies for strong reasons - either to avoid talking about intensely personal matters that others are ignorant of (pon farr), or for a greater purpose (ST II, VI, Taste of Armageddon, etc).

But why lie about something that would be common knowledge to anybody who had a little knowledge of Starfleet history? It would be like a Royal Navy officer responding to the same question the same way because his ancestor was Fletcher Christian. It's a dumb lie and the likely response is gonna be "But what about the Bounty?"

 

[The Wormhole]

Inter arma enim silent leges

I really don't see this war as being so desperate that letting someone getaway with a few hundred counts of murder is deemed necessary and justified.

 

[Refuge]

Inter arma enim silent leges

Lawlessness should never be encouraged otherwise why have them? Even in times of war there should be law and conventions.

 

[fireproof78]

That actually would make for an interesting debate topic. If a criminal has potential uses in society should they get to escape justice a lesser 'qualified' law breaker would not?

Yes, because Star Trek has demonstrated that the Federation society is very structured and organized.

Lawlessness should never be encouraged otherwise why have them? Even in times of war there should be law and conventions.

Who is encouraging it? It's simply an observation.

 

[Refuge]

Yes, because Star Trek has demonstrated that the Federation society is very structured and organized.

Who is encouraging it? It's simply an observation.

To a point since it seems critical to bring up other Trek to justify Discovery, I get Janeway having to incorporate the Marquis. Human resources were slim. To a lesser extent, Tom Paris who at least was doing some of his time on a penal colony of breathtakingly beautiful New Zealand. However Lorca as a leader is corrupting from a position of power. He has the history of killing his crew. So he got away with it too. However can anyone say that he hasn't crossed lines since then? That the character of the man hasn't first allowed for a mutineer to have free reign and has now landed his entire crew in the middle of nowhere?

Ignoring or circumventing the law is something Discovery is showcasing.

 

[fireproof78]

To a point since it seems critical to bring up other Trek to justify Discovery, I get Janeway having to incorporate the Marquis. Human resources were slim. To a lesser extent, Tom Paris who at least was doing some of his time on a penal colony of breathtakingly beautiful New Zealand. However Lorca as a leader is corrupting from a position of power. He has the history of killing his crew. So he got away with it too. However can anyone say that he hasn't crossed lines since then? That the character of the man hasn't first allowed for a mutineer to have free reign and has now landed his entire crew in the middle of nowhere?

Ignoring or circumventing the law is something Discovery is showcasing.

Showcasing and endorsing are two different things. Is "In the Pale Moonlight" an endorsement of unlawful activity as well? What about "The Search for Spock?"

Secondly, and this seems to be my default position so much I might have to make it my signature-the show isn't done yet! This isn't the end of an episode where things are wrapped up-this is an ongoing season arc that hasn't completed yet. We don't know the consequences of Lorca's actions or Burnham's fate.

So, it seems rather critical to me, to criticize the show for not tying up lose ends when the story isn't tied up.

 

[Refuge]

Showcasing and endorsing are two different things. Is "In the Pale Moonlight" an endorsement of unlawful activity as well? What about "The Search for Spock?"

Secondly, and this seems to be my default position so much I might have to make it my signature-the show isn't done yet! This isn't the end of an episode where things are wrapped up-this is an ongoing season arc that hasn't completed yet. We don't know the consequences of Lorca's actions or Burnham's fate.

So, it seems rather critical to me, to criticize the show for not tying up lose ends when the story isn't tied up.

I really don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of various episodes of other Trek, apart from Voyager and I'm sure others a better versed there too.

You know people are going to comment on the state of play. No one is going to wait until the last episode of Discovery's run to pass remark However I will criticise how it is playing out so far. It deserves it. Michael and Lorca are virtually running the show and one is a sentenced criminal and the other is a nut job. More information isn't going to change that is it? Michael did what she did. Lorca the same. Even Cornwall thinks Lorca is troubled. That is in the story to date.

 

[fireproof78]

You know people are going to comment on the state of play. No one is going to wait until the last episode of Discovery's run to pass remark However I will criticise how it is playing out so far. It deserves it. Michael and Lorca are virtually running the show and one is a sentenced criminal and the other is a nut job. More information isn't going to change that is it? Michael did what she did. Lorca the same. Even Cornwall thinks Lorca is troubled. That is in the story to date.

So? The consequences haven't played out yet-that's my only point. I don't approve of Lorca's action and generally find him a questionable moral character, but he's still interesting. This is a story, not a morality tale.

 

[The Wormhole]

Lorca stands before the Shadow Tribunal.
Shadow Tribunal: We call to order the court martial of Captain Gabriel Lorca over the loss of USS Buran. Captain Lorca, your opening statement?
Lorca: I don't give a damn.
Shadow: You also stand accused of a few hundred counts of murder. How do you plead?
Lorca: I still don't give a damn.
Shadow: Captain Lorca, seriously! You're entire future in Starfleet depends on these proceedings!
Lorca: I really don't give a damn.
Shadow: *Sighs* Well, I understand the Discovery needs a new captain. Report to Admiral Cornwell for your briefing, case dismissed.
Lorca: Cornwell, huh? I definitely gave a damn about her...

 

[Greg Cox]

I really don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of various episodes of other Trek, apart from Voyager and I'm sure others a better versed there too.

You know people are going to comment on the state of play. No one is going to wait until the last episode of Discovery's run to pass remark However I will criticise how it is playing out so far. It deserves it. Michael and Lorca are virtually running the show and one is a sentenced criminal and the other is a nut job. More information isn't going to change that is it? Michael did what she did. Lorca the same. Even Cornwall thinks Lorca is troubled. That is in the story to date.

But the point is that, unlike Trek shows of the past, where any moral dilemmas were resolved by the end of the episode, this is basically one long episode that isn't over yet. So it's like trying to pass judgment on Matt Decker halfway through "The Doomsday Machine" or Captain Ben Maxwell halfway through TNG's "The Wounded."

Kinda hard to do when we haven't reached the end of this story yet.