Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x13 - "What's Past Is Prologue"

[Amaris]

@Lord Garth, @GeekUSACarl, et. al, there's a point where diminishing returns kicks in, guys. I think you've passed it pages ago. The more you argue, the more these absurd ideas get tossed back as if they're legitimate. Repeat something enough, or hear it often, and it attains a form of legitimacy. Right now it's getting a LOT of air time. Just a word of advice.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

@Lord Garth, @GeekUSACarl, et. al, there's a point where diminishing returns kicks in, guys. I think you've passed it pages ago. The more you argue, the more these absurd ideas get tossed back as if they're legitimate. Repeat something enough, or hear it often, and it attains a form of legitimacy. Right now it's getting a LOT of air time. Just a word of advice.

Well, yeah you're right but what other excuse can I find to slack off at work?

 

[Amaris]

Well, yeah you're right but what other excuse can I find to slack off at work?

You could always hide in the bathroom for six hours with just your phone. If anyone asks, use the magic phrase "explosive diarrhea."

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Haha. I've literally called out the producers for their pisspoor direction and characterization with this series multiple times.

Third time I'm posting this;

This is who is mainly at fault for STD; Aaron Harbarts and Gretchen J Berg.

Terrible people to give the keys to the Star Trek universe to. They've turned it to complete shlock.



Like I said, post history. Instead of bringing up stuff already discussed.

Out of interest, if you had the choice of 'giving the keys' to someone to run the Star Trek universe, who would it be? Is there a particular writer or showrunner on another franchise whose work you like?

 

[SJA]

the After Trek show is one of the nice things about watching trek week by week again when it is a new show, rather then reruns. nice ~2hr break every sun night.

How terrified of Isaacs was Mira on this? Had to chuckle! He looked petrified that Isaacs was going to start swearing or threatening to kill Trump or something!

 

[XCV330]

Wikipedia is just as 'meaningless' as Youtube, Garth.

The only difference with YT is you can get a good sense of how the current generation is using the term today. Whether you believe that is accurate or inaccurate to the origin of the term historically, it doesn't change the fact that 'Mary Sue' is very commonly used today to describe OP characters in genre fiction that are often pushed with agendas in mind.

Rey being the most recent example of this, and the discussion of whether Rey is a Mary Sue or not was everywhere... even on Collider Movie Talk and other big channels.

The current use of the Mary Sue term isn't going anywhere.

Got some issues there, doncha.
But that's ok. it's cool. I came up with something for you.

just call your buddies from Axanar. We'll work something out.

 

[Lord Garth]

No it's not, Mary Sue is a specific character archtype.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CommonMarySueTraits

So here's my question for you, Yes or No does Burnham possess more then 50% of those traits?

Okay, let's do this. Cross-referenced with my previous post linking to the Wikipedia Article:

While Mary Sue is too nebulous to be judged by any hard and fast standard, certain traits have become surprisingly popular in defining what "makes" a Sue. In an effort to make their characters more attractive without having to do the leg work of natural character development, the authors just add some of these superficial traits to their character. Below are the ones that the collective unconscious (so to speak) find especially attractive and end up incorporating into their characters with regularity.

I've already explained Burnham's character development thus far. No need to retype what I already just typed.

With the way the term "Mary Sue" has mutated over time, a great many people just end up labeling any character overdosed with these traits as a Mary Sue regardless of her importance within the story (or because they just don't like the character). That's not necessarily true.

This is the beginning of the entry, so the traits will be detailed below but, as of this typing, it seems people simply don't like the character and are using "Mary Sue" as an excuse to justify their dislike at best and their bigotry at worst.

Even if a character has quite a number of the traits described below, Mary-Sueness can still be averted by a good enough explanation for why they're there.

So TV Tropes acknowledges that one size doesn't fit all and not everything is always the same.

Some female characters may seem over-powered and a bit "too good to be true" on paper, but when placed in context they can be well-developed, three-dimensional characters. It's when a trait exists more to make somebody stand out than to develop them as a character that it starts going into Mary Sue territory (unless it's Played for Laughs). Alternatively, you may feel as if the writer is frantically trying to justify a trait to themselves and the reader.

It's interesting that they have to go out of their way to explain that female characters can be good at what they do and be three-dimensional characters at the same time. That says a lot about a sizable portion of the readership, the online community, and the population in general.

Onto the good stuff...

Personality

What personality? The typical Mary Sue doesn't have one, because she isn't meant to be a character; rather, she's an entity by which the author makes cool stuff happen. She's thus not defined by her personality, but rather by her special powers, fantastic romances, and random acts of heroism.

Burnham has a personality.

• What little personality a Mary Sue has isn't as important as how other characters react to it. No matter how shy or socially awkward Mary Sue is supposed to be, other characters will be inexplicably drawn to her.

  
  The only characters drawn to Burnham have been Tilly because she's her roomate and they work together and Ash who was an ill-fated love interest. Saru isn't drawn to Burnham. He was antagonistic to her, then warmed up to her, but that's the extent of it.
  
  The other characters don't have any particular bond with Burnham except Lorca but only because he already knew a version of her in the Mirror Universe.
  
  So, this doesn't apply.
  
  

  All of her ideas are brilliant, all of her jokes are funny, and all of her advice is spot-on.

  
  Some of her ideas are flawed. I maintain that what she thought about how to approach the Klingons at the Binary Stars was flawed. And she doesn't give social advice. Tilly was the one who was trying to get Michael to say something to Ash when they first meet him.
  
  

  People will trust her implicitly, even more than their families, significant others, or closest friends. Anyone who doesn't react to her this way is usually portrayed as evil or stupid. She doesn't have to do anything to deserve this treatment; she's an impossibly good person because the author says she is.

  
  No.
  
  

  She's extremely persuasive; everyone finds her opinions to be better than their own, regardless of the actual content of her supposedly awesome arguments. This is especially common in an Author Tract. It's also particularly jarring when characters who are usually very stubborn immediately take her side.

  
  She can be persuasive but no one ever immediately takes her side. Since the last part was an added qualifier, I'll give this one to you.
  
  

  She's a Friend to All Living Things and All-Loving Hero. Although the other characters are nowhere near as awesome as she is, she will forgive them for all their imperfections. And she's willing to risk her own safety to save another person, even people she just met. This is such a Mary Sue Classic trait that authors are starting to catch on, and it's gradually becoming less common.

  
  Nope. She's not a friend to all living things. She's also not all-loving.
  
  

  However, an equally valid (And equally grating) Is a sue who treats others with contempt, anger, and insultingness, yet DESPITE everything, every single character (except for the bad guys) adores her. Even characters whom she constantly treats like crap still want to be "best fwiends" with her and risk their lives for her.

  
  Also not the case. She tries to be as civil to people as possible.
  
  

  She's incorruptible — so much so that she may be unaware of the concept of temptation.

  
  We haven't seen enough to know this for sure. I'm going to provisionally say "no".
  
  

  She has a Dark and Troubled Past, which she deals with in two ways: either she turns up the Wangst (and thus gets lots of attention), or she remains unreasonably cheerful and optimistic in spite of it and becomes a full-on Genki Girl. There is no middle ground here.

  
  Except there is a middle ground. She's not All Wangst All the Time and Super Cheery is not how I'd describe her. So, once again, No.
  
  

  She may be flawed, but these are all Informed Flaws. This usually happens when the author is actively avoiding these common traits but doesn't know how to do this realistically. This usually leads to "flaws" that never actually hinder the character or make her look bad. If it's something that makes her Darker and Edgier, like substance abuse or nymphomania, we never see any of the drawbacks of it. If she's a klutz, that just makes her a Cute Clumsy Girl. And sometimes she will even complain about her awesome power or stunning beauty or special place in the world, for no reason other than author realizing that the character can't look too perfect — except she usually forgets to write in circumstances that would actually cause someone to react that way.

  
  She's not a klutz nor does she do drugs. She never complains about "awesome power" or "stunning beauty" and she doesn't see herself as having a "special place in the world", she sees herself as going back to fucking prison.
  
  So, no. This doesn't apply.
  
  

  And occasionally she'll be a complete asshole, even when she's supposed to be all of the above. This can manifest itself in several ways:

  
  We've never seen her act like a complete asshole or an asshole at all.
  
  

  The author wants to write a badass but doesn't know how. This leads to a character who mistreats everyone around her and is never called out on her abrasive, casually abusive behavior. And other badass characters, no matter how tough or violent, provide her with an opportunity to "put them in their place" — or rather, they instantly capitulate and turn into meek Wangst factories around her.

  
  Mirror Georgiou is more of a badass (and one they know how to write) whereas Michael isn't written as a badass. Except when she did that landing at the end of "Context Is for Kings" and when she killed Kol before getting beamed out at the end of "Into the Forest I Go" which I thought were great scenes that they knew how to write.
  
  So, sorry, but this also doesn't apply.
  
  

  The author is trying to present her assholery as a flaw, but fails like with all the other flaws listed above. A "flaw" like stubbornness will never come back to bite her because she will always turn out to be right all along. A bad temper just gives her an excuse to pwn her enemies, all of whom deserve it. Rudeness or tactlessness is usually portrayed positively as a form of Brutal Honesty.

  
  This doesn't happen anywhere.
  
  

  The author doesn't know how to hold back the character, meaning that she will succeed at practically everything. This means that when she encounters rules or authority figures who would otherwise prevent her from doing what she wants to do, she rolls right through them (and they praise her for her "boldness" in defying regulations). If a bad guy is violent and aggressive, she can beat him by being more violent and aggressive (with all that entails). It's impossible for her to go overboard because she's protected by Protagonist-Centered Morality.

  
  Hmmmm.... I'd give you this one if she wasn't sentenced after Battle at the Binary Stars which is the only time she breaks protocol. So, I won't.
  
  .
  .
  .
  
  That's the Personality Section. I'll stop for now. Let's tally so far.
  
  I give one to you, out of 14. So nowhere near 50% so far.

 

[Lord Garth]

I'm also going to keep going. But I'll take a break for now.

This is what happens when you ask me to put my money where my mouth is. If I say something, I don't say it without making sure I can't at least back it up.

 

[Captain Killy]

Now, just so you all don’t think I’m just some uncritical gushing Fangirl, I do actually have two little nitpicks about last nights episodes. Because you know, I’m a geek and it’s kinds what we do...

1) When The Emperor activated the “Emergency Transport” why did she go brood in her private residence? Why didn’t she have, like I don’t know, a getaway shuttle prepped and ready, just in case of this very type of situation. Conceivable she still has powerful assests and loyalists throughout the Empire right? So get the fuck out of there woman, gather your forces and live to fight another day..

2) At the end when The Emperor is going to make her “last stand” to provide Burnham the time she needs to do the thing she needed to do, she said something to the affect of “I’m an Emperor defeated...” and I’m all like “The fuck you are woman!! You just shanked the guy who attempted to take your throne and threw his ass into a mother fucking sun!! You won! By the laws of the MU as we know them, once Lorca’s men burst through those doors to see you standing there in all your badass glory, towering over the mangled bodies of the fallen with bloodied sword in hand, they should have all dropped their weapons, given you the Imperial salute and cried out “Long live the Emperor!!”

And those are my two nitpicks of he week...

Ok, thinking a bit more about this and I’m thinking maybe it was about the optics of that scene, There was no Lorca. So no way to verify he’s really dead, so his loyalist’s still keep on fighting. So maybe what The Emperor should have done was cut off his damn head before chucking the rest of him out the moon door. That way when Lorca’s men come busting into that throne room the see Georgiou, against all odds, still standing, bloody sword in one hand and Lorca’s severed head in the other. That may very well have given them a moment of pause. At least long enough for one of Lorca’s crew to think to themself “Fuck this shit!” start shooting their comrades and arranging a comfy little position for themself in the Georgiou administration. I hear Andor’s looking for a new Governor...

 

[XCV330]

Ok, thinking a bit more about this and I’m thinking maybe it was about the optics of that scene, There was no Lorca. So no way to verify he’s really dead, so his loyalist’s still keep on fighting. So maybe what The Emperor should have done was cut off his damn head before chucking the rest of him out the moon door. That way when Lorca’s men come busting into that throne room the see Georgiou, against all odds, still standing, bloody sword in one hand and Lorca’s severed head in the other. That may very well have given them a moment of pause. At least long enough for one of Lorca’s crew to think to themself “Fuck this shit!” start shooting their comrades and arranging a comfy little position for themself in the Georgiou administration. I hear Andor’s looking for a new Governor...

You're from the Mirror Universe aren't you

 

[Succubint]

I loved the episode. It was engaging and exciting. I went on an emotional rollercoaster as well, even teared up a few times. Saru's inspirational speech to the crew has convinced me he'd be a great Starfleet captain. But I also felt the heart strings tugging when Burnham told Lorca that the Federation would have helped him get back home if he'd only asked, when Georgiou offered to buy Burnham time by sacrificing herself and when Stamets remembered his beloved Hugh's words and found his way back via the music/love.

I'm still disappointed with Lorca turning into a full villain. I would have preferred him being a more complicated antagonist at the end. Still, that said, Isaacs sold his scenes and I forgave them for the heel turn.

Mirror Lorca got fully impaled in the chest before he fell through the 'moon door' and was vaporized. He dead. Really dead.

However, there is hope. MU records that Micheal refers to in Despite Yourself say that Lorca is presumed to have escaped. The Buran was definitely destroyed, but if the MU think Lorca is still alive, the window is definitely open in future seasons to bring Prime Lorca back.

Is Hugh's consciousness in that little spore that flew over to Tilly and sunk into her shoulder? One can hope.

 

[Captain Killy]

You're from the Mirror Universe aren't you

No, just a Table Top Roleplayer. Though admittedly there are similarities...

 

[T'Bonz]

Meh. I've rather enjoyed the series on the whole but I've just come away from this episode feeling disappointed.

It's frustrating because we had the prospect of a morally grey but interesting and likeable character played by a talented actor in the form of Lorca dangled in front of us. TV has changed over the past few years and I was excited to see Star Trek feature a character with proper depth who might not be perfect but you can still cheer on, like Jaime Lannister post redemption arc. But it was snatched away, and turns out he's just a space racist who was easily defeated by Burnham who's grand plan was to escape a throne room full of armed guards completely unharmed when getting away from Georgiou, before returning to a throne room full of armed guards and killing them all before stopping Lorca in his tracks since he is apparently enamoured by her sheer brilliance. So much wasted potential. In the end the series's most compelling character is used for ham-fisted social commentary that was acceptable in the 60s or even 90s, but after a 13 year break and $8 million per episode I was hoping for more.

This, *sigh*.

But most won't care because da AWESOME KILLY-TILLY IS STILL WITH US.

*snore*

 

[Uhura's Song]

I like the idea that PU Lorca could still be out there.

I love it that we get more Michelle Yeoh. Even if it is the murderous MU version.

The Avatar-ish spore on Tilly means something.

Hope time-travel isn't the answer. I don't mind the time-travel/loop shows or the MU shows. But I do kind of deduct points when it is the basis of the show (Entetprise).

 

[Borgminister]

May the spores be with you!

 

[Jax]

Great episode but I was hoping they would make the Spore Drive unusable by the end. So the Federation loss the war to the Klingons? I assume we are getting a temporal reset at somepoint because you know TNG, DS9, VOY.

 

[Wowbagger]

Out of interest, if you had the choice of 'giving the keys' to someone to run the Star Trek universe, who would it be? Is there a particular writer or showrunner on another franchise whose work you like?

Manny Coto's a proven talent for a prequel property like Discovery.

Russell T. Davies' Star Trek would probably be terrible, and definitely insane, but I suspect it would be tremendously beloved and capture the basic spirit of the thing better than anything in decades.

Seth MacFarlane might be worth it just for how confusing time travellers from 2014 would find it. "Wait, who is President of the United States?" "Yeah, yeah, whatever, but wait until you hear who's running Star Trek now!"

I'd still be really interested in seeing Bryan Fuller make a Star Trek series. "The Vulcan Hello" screenplay (the best of the season to date) was a tantalizing hint.

And I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a longstanding fantasy that one day a CBS Executive hears my fan audio drama and is so taken by it he calls me up and offers me the chance to launch a new televised series.

 

[XCV330]

Manny Coto's a proven talent for a prequel property like Discovery.

Russell T. Davies' Star Trek would probably be terrible, and definitely insane, but I suspect it would be tremendously beloved and capture the basic spirit of the thing better than anything in decades.

Seth MacFarlane might be worth it just for how confusing time travellers from 2014 would find it. "Wait, who is President of the United States?" "Yeah, yeah, whatever, but wait until you hear who's running Star Trek now!"

I'd still be really interested in seeing Bryan Fuller make a Star Trek series. "The Vulcan Hello" screenplay (the best of the season to date) was a tantalizing hint.

And I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a longstanding fantasy that one day a CBS Executive hears my fan audio drama and is so taken by it he calls me up and offers me the chance to launch a new televised series.

I would love to see Manny Coto at the helm.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

I would love to see Manny Coto at the helm.

I dunno, having someone be Jack Bauer in space would either be the single most awesome thing ever, or the single most worst thing ever.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Manny Coto's a proven talent for a prequel property like Discovery.

Russell T. Davies' Star Trek would probably be terrible, and definitely insane, but I suspect it would be tremendously beloved and capture the basic spirit of the thing better than anything in decades.

Seth MacFarlane might be worth it just for how confusing time travellers from 2014 would find it. "Wait, who is President of the United States?" "Yeah, yeah, whatever, but wait until you hear who's running Star Trek now!"

I'd still be really interested in seeing Bryan Fuller make a Star Trek series. "The Vulcan Hello" screenplay (the best of the season to date) was a tantalizing hint.

And I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a longstanding fantasy that one day a CBS Executive hears my fan audio drama and is so taken by it he calls me up and offers me the chance to launch a new televised series.

I agree with you on Manny Coto, his work on Enterprise S4 really pushed that show forward. Bryan Fuller just seems to be way to flakey to be a showrunner. His shows either get cancelled or he's forced to bail because he's working on another project. He left Discovery to work on American Gods and now he's gone from that too.

By the way your dream may come true. Kirsten Beyer got a gig on the Discovery writing staff thanks to her work on the Voyager relaunch.