In The Pale Moonlight

[Gelnon]

This has to be one of my favourite episoides, i like the cloak and dagger feel to it, i like the way they translated a Captain's personal log into a whole episode.
Garak shows his Obsidian Order skills really well in this, and of course it's a pivotal episode in the sense that it changes the course of the Dominion war, and shows Sisko's character as purely Human in the sense that he was prepared to sacrifice his principles as a starfleet captain in order to obtain what he wanted and that was the Romulans to enter the war alongside the federation, i thoroughly enjoyed this episode.

 

[NCC-73515]

The day Sisko lost his entire personal log

 

[Gelnon]

The day Sisko lost his entire personal log

Good response Lol

 

[Syn]

It was an excellent story, and presented almost perfectly. The struggle was demonstrated in a way that was relatable and still befitting of the Star Trek universe.

 

[JesterFace]

what if.... it is faaaake.... ?

 

[Gelnon]

[

 

[Ocanain]

From the first moment that we see Sisko talking to Picard I found him a very unlikeable character without a sense of integrity. This episode really clarified that. Quite honestly I find quite a few characters in Star Trek unlikeable but Sisko particularly presents the Federation as seen by other races, to me. When the Ferengi, Romulans or Cardassians talk of the guise of the Federation, being a conceited and controlling force masquerading in civility and kindness- I think of Sisko and the way he subverts ethical adherence at every opportunity.

 

[Gelnon]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[at Quark's]

From the first moment that we see Sisko talking to Picard I found him a very unlikeable character without a sense of integrity. This episode really clarified that. Quite honestly I find quite a few characters in Star Trek unlikeable but Sisko particularly presents the Federation as seen by other races, to me. When the Ferengi, Romulans or Cardassians talk of the guise of the Federation, being a conceited and controlling force masquerading in civility and kindness- I think of Sisko and the way he subverts ethical adherence at every opportunity.

I see two different things at play.

First, early Sisko clearly has some issues. He's still hurting deeply from the loss of his wife, and never really moved on with his life, as the Prophets also tell him. Then, he has to take orders from the very man who murdered his wife. And perhaps he can rationalise it by saying that it was not really him, just his body, but I don't think you have to be particularly insincere to show the reaction to Picard Sisko did. We also see him improve along those lines.

Second, Sisko inhabits a universe in which the rulebook of Picard simply doesn't always work anymore- it's the way DS9 was written. That is, Sisko is in a situation in which being ethical will result in unavoidable defeat, and Picard never was in that situation (at least, not in TNG, don't know about the more recent series). The closest Picard ever came to that dilemma was choosing between being ethical and not losing an important advantage for the Federation (I, Borg, The Pegasus and Insurrection come to mind). There are also instances in which he is facing immediate defeat by an invincible enemy, but in those cases usually no ethics as such are involved.

I see it as a kind of increasing realism throughout the series. Kirk didn't always get what he wanted, but usually an 'impossible' situation was resolved by being "impossibly clever" (out-logicking a ruthlessly logical machine, etc). In TNG, the feeling was more that perhaps you can't always do that, but at least you can always do the ethical thing, and while it will cost you a lot on occasion, you'll survive at the least. That, too, is taken away in DS9- the choice there is between survival and being ethical. The next step would have been to admit there are even situations in which there is no ethical course of action, or at least not one that's clear.

But that probably would have been too dark or ambiguous, even for DS9.

 

[Ocanain]

I see two different things at play.

First, early Sisko clearly has some issues. He's still hurting deeply from the loss of his wife, and never really moved on with his life, as the Prophets also tell him. Then, he has to take orders from the very man who murdered his wife. And perhaps he can rationalise it by saying that it was not really him, just his body, but I don't think you have to be particularly insincere to show the reaction to Picard Sisko did. We also see him improve along those lines.

Second, Sisko inhabits a universe in which the rulebook of Picard simply doesn't always work anymore- it's the way DS9 was written. That is, Sisko is in a situation in which being ethical will result in unavoidable defeat, and Picard never was in that situation (at least, not in TNG, don't know about the more recent series). The closest Picard ever came to that dilemma was choosing between being ethical and not losing an important advantage for the Federation (I, Borg, The Pegasus and Insurrection come to mind). There are also instances in which he is facing immediate defeat by an invincible enemy, but in those cases usually no ethics as such are involved.

I see it as a kind of increasing realism throughout the series. Kirk didn't always get what he wanted, but usually an 'impossible' situation was resolved by being "impossibly clever" (out-logicking a ruthlessly logical machine, etc). In TNG, the feeling was more that perhaps you can't always do that, but at least you can always do the ethical thing, and while it will cost you a lot on occasion, you'll survive at the least. That, too, is taken away in DS9- the choice there is between survival and being ethical. The next step would have been to admit there are even situations in which there is no ethical course of action, or at least not one that's clear.

But that probably would have been too dark or ambiguous, even for DS9.

Very thoughtful commentary raising some very good points.

In regards to the meeting of Picard and Sisko, it wasn’t so much the instinctive reaction that shocked me as it’s indeed understandable to comprehend the animosity. What struck me was the lack of professionalism. There was no structure to his presentation and the resident emotion flowed. My interpretation was his manner of conviction and integrity. We would all have trouble dealing with the emotion but I expected more control from his position and imminent status.

It’s also valid to raise the conditions in which Picard and Sisko navigated their command. My view of Starfleet officers entails a particular degree of inherent ethical perspective. Picard was driven by those ethics more than most but I find them two extremes. If there is an arbitrary point which is the required ethical standard, Picard is over and Sisko is under. Early on, the vulnerability of the station is established but I don’t feel that Sisko’s approach evaded any more danger than Picard would have- except perhaps in reference to command of the Defiant.

I do feel that survival without ethics voids the entire mission of the Federation too. After all, in real terms we can survive society by many unscrupulous means but the end result is corrupted. The vision of what the Federation represents would be debased and devalued.

Just my opinion but I am not incredibly forgiving of his character, especially in later episodes in the way in which he judges Section 31.

 

[NCC-73515]

What struck me was the lack of professionalism. There was no structure to his presentation and the resident emotion flowed. My interpretation was his manner of conviction and integrity. We would all have trouble dealing with the emotion but I expected more control from his position and imminent status.

He was close to quitting, wasn't he? And he was transferred to the most remote and sad outpost, the wilderness as Bashir calls it, because nobody knew how important DS9 would become. Then suddenly it was the center of trade and war. He had to grow with the unexpected developments he didn't want but still got.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

This is a brilliant episode and showed just what DS9 could do with great writers and actors, going into some dark places and showing just had Sisko has been affected by the war.

Because I can live with it. I can live with it.

 

[at Quark's]

Very thoughtful commentary raising some very good points.

It’s also valid to raise the conditions in which Picard and Sisko navigated their command. My view of Starfleet officers entails a particular degree of inherent ethical perspective. Picard was driven by those ethics more than most but I find them two extremes. If there is an arbitrary point which is the required ethical standard, Picard is over and Sisko is under. Early on, the vulnerability of the station is established but I don’t feel that Sisko’s approach evaded any more danger than Picard would have- except perhaps in reference to command of the Defiant.

Can you provide some examples of where you thought Sisko's inherent ethical perspective was "under", other than in in the pale moonlight episode? You might be right, but I need to have a bit more focus to see what we are actually talking about.

 

[NCC-73515]

Can you provide some examples of where you thought Sisko's inherent ethical perspective was "under", other than in in the pale moonlight episode? You might be right, but I need to have a bit more focus to see what we are actually talking about.

Poisoning a planet

 

[at Quark's]

Poisoning a planet

Good one, completely forgot about that when I posted.

Still, Sisko wasn't exactly balanced when he did that - he was fanatical in getting back at Eddington. Other 24th starship captains have had such moments too, Janeway in Equinox (admitted, her deeds were on a much smaller scale), and Picard in First Contact when he refuses to blow up the Enterprise, potentially endangering all of humanity with that decision because he was so blind with hatred. The difference I suppose being that he was convinced by Lily to do so after all. Sisko had no such civilian on board at that time who could convince him, as the crew obviously couldn't -- just as the crew in First Contact would have obeyed his orders to fight till the last man, as is shown by Beverley's reaction.

 

[Beckerjr]

Sisko is "unlikable" because he acts like a...gasp...human being. He's not some paragon of virtue who always makes the right choice or always can figure stuff out. It's a hallmark of DS9 in general. Yea I'm being passive aggressive in throwing shade at other certain ST characters here.

 

[Sidewinder]

Sisko and the characters of DS9 were more relatable than the previous two casts were. Every cast member had serious flaws that were fleshed out throughout the series. Kirk, Picard and their crews rarely showed flaws, at least in their TV series. The movies expanded the characters a little.

 

[Sidewinder]

In The Pale Moonlight is one of my favorite episodes. It's not flashy with space battles or character conflicts (other than Sisko with his own morality), but it has all the elements of great drama.

Add an extremely important part played by Garak as the one who has to get his hands dirty for the greater good. His entire "I'd call that a bargain" speech at the end was Robinson's best work of the entire series.

Sisko talking to his personal log, degrading the more drunk he gets and talking about how he can live with it because he's saving millions, maybe billions of lives at the cost of his conscience that he could live with it.

This episode was a situation where the ends justified the means, because if it doesn't happen that way and the Romulans sit back, The Dominion wins and enslaves the entire quadrant.

 

[JesterFace]

Sisko is "unlikable" because he acts like a...gasp...human being. He's not some paragon of virtue who always makes the right choice or always can figure stuff out.

Isn't Star Trek about how humans can be better? Better than what humanity has been so far.

 

[Dale Sams]

I see two different things at play.

First, early Sisko clearly has some issues. He's still hurting deeply from the loss of his wife, and never really moved on with his life, as the Prophets also tell him. Then, he has to take orders from the very man who murdered his wife. And perhaps he can rationalise it by saying that it was not really him, just his body, but I don't think you have to be particularly insincere to show the reaction to Picard Sisko did. We also see him improve along those lines.

Second, Sisko inhabits a universe in which the rulebook of Picard simply doesn't always work anymore- it's the way DS9 was written. That is, Sisko is in a situation in which being ethical will result in unavoidable defeat, and Picard never was in that situation (at least, not in TNG, don't know about the more recent series). The closest Picard ever came to that dilemma was choosing between being ethical and not losing an important advantage for the Federation (I, Borg, The Pegasus and Insurrection come to mind). There are also instances in which he is facing immediate defeat by an invincible enemy, but in those cases usually no ethics as such are involved.



But that probably would have been too dark or ambiguous, even for DS9.

In my head canon SF made 1701-E a USO ship during the Dominion War because they couldn't afford to have a guy like Picard calling the shots. I mean look at the thing!! Data and Riker would have been told a long time ago to become Captains or retire. Or let them be 'clowns' on a USO ship running around flying the flag. There's nothing in ST: Insurrection to indicate they are in a war perilously close to losing. While Sisko is personally putting his ass on the line at AR-558....Picard is AGAIN defying orders and fucking up Federation plans.

Spoiler: Please use spoiler code when discussing Picard

FFS if Picard had discovered Sisko's plans, he would have revealed the whole thing. Shit he probably still would 25 years later. Maybe that will be part of PIC S2. Raffi discovers Siskos machinations and stupidly tells Picard. Then Agnes reveals she can probably wipe the memory from PIC since he's synthetic.

 

[Dale Sams]

Isn't Star Trek about how humans can be better? Better than what humanity has been so far.

No. It was

"Wagon Train to the Stars"
Then "Humans Can Be Better"
Then "This Sucks and is Really Hard to Write For"
Then "Lets Phase Out That Humans Can Be Better and Really....Were They??"

 

[Nyotarules]

From the first moment that we see Sisko talking to Picard I found him a very unlikeable character without a sense of integrity. This episode really clarified that. Quite honestly I find quite a few characters in Star Trek unlikeable but Sisko particularly presents the Federation as seen by other races, to me. When the Ferengi, Romulans or Cardassians talk of the guise of the Federation, being a conceited and controlling force masquerading in civility and kindness- I think of Sisko and the way he subverts ethical adherence at every opportunity.

Sisko is proof that humans do not get closer to perfection just because their society and technology improves, no matter Roddenberry vision, compare humans in 2020 to humans in 1620.

Isn't Star Trek about how humans can be better? Better than what humanity has been so far.

Star Trek is about humans can be better than their ancestors, just as we consider ourselves better than our ancestors, it does not make us perfect. (culturally we realise we should not treat women as children with breasts, kidnap foreigners based on skin colour and force them to work for free, decide someone's job prospects based on their class background, or steal land from other nation states and exploit their resources to create an empire). And yet 400 years later, I cannot get a cab in NYC.

If Picard was in charge of DS9 the Dominion would rule the Alpha and Beta quadrants, Picard is not a soldier.