Latecomer To This: JANEWAY DIED?!?
- Thread starter Capt_Piett
- Start date
- Status
Right.
So the female Star Trek editor Margaret Clark decided to off Janeway because she doesn't believe in female captains.
I have to agree with Brit. There is a new "feminist" group that believes in the old standards and are trying to get that. Now, I'd point you to that link, if 1. I still had the link and 2. wasn't a right-wing religious group. This board is Trek, not religious issues, but even so, such women do exist. They believe women who use birth control and limit the number of children they have so they can have a career are being selfish. They also believe a woman should stay home and raise children. So, it is entirely possible.
If they don't woman in command then why the hell have did they focus so much on Hernandez in Destiny, and promote Ezri to Captain, and put Kira in command of DS9/Defiant, and make Riker's XO on Titan a woman, and Uhura head of Starfleet Security, and make Saavik a Captain, and Batanides an Admiral, and include Hallie Gannon in Vaguard, and give Demora Sulu command of the Ent-B.
If anyone can add to this list please do.
If anyone can add to this list please do.
Tell Margaret Clark to her face that you think she believes in any of that and she'll laugh so hard they'll be able to hear it in China.
In your opinion, sure. I can even see the argument you'd make there.
But to me, Trek is about optimism and progress, no matter what life throws at you, and in that regard the recent Destiny trilogy is the most profound and perfect statement of Trek's philosophy ever put to paper or screen, I think.
All in the eye of the beholder.
In the long-awaited sequel to Articles of the Federation, President Bacco faces her greatest challenge yet when the presidency is contested by none other than the cryogenically preserved brain of Sarah Palin...
"Oh, Andor's a pretty country... whaddaya mean, planet?"
If you're referring to the blink-and-you'll-miss-it handful of paragraphs towards the end, that was neither sufficient nor satisfying. And by blink-and-you'll-miss-it, I mean literally. I never even noticed. It wasn't until I came on here and somebody pointed out that they thought her 'true' death occured later that I went back I found that blip at the end of the book. And even there, I'd argue that, as described, it wasn't really Janeway, but a clutch of instincts that had yet to be eradicated by the Collective--at best, an echo of the person Janeway had once been, stripped of all higher reasoning abilities. It was no more a testament to the human condition than an infant's wail.
Having actually missed this the first time around, I'm in the interesting position of being able to compare the version of my original reading to the one actually on page, and I'm honestly not sure which I'd say is better. Without the blip, Janeway's victimization was violent but brief. As written, her victimization must be a prolonged experience of psychological torture as she is forced to watch her body and knowledge be used to kill her colleagues and damn near devastate her civilization, and as the Collective erodes away at her will until there is nothing left except a confused, inchoate mass of residual emotion. This echo does manage to regain a sliver of agency in the end, but is it really worth the extended suffering and torture? I'd say it isn't. It doesn't redeem what was done to her; doesn't even approach it.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
"Oh, Andor's a pretty country... whaddaya mean, planet?"
If you're referring to the blink-and-you'll-miss-it handful of paragraphs towards the end, that was neither sufficient nor satisfying. And by blink-and-you'll-miss-it, I mean literally. I never even noticed. It wasn't until I came on here and somebody pointed out that they thought her 'true' death occured later that I went back I found that blip at the end of the book. And even there, I'd argue that, as described, it wasn't really Janeway, but a clutch of instincts that had yet to be eradicated by the Collective--at best, an echo of the person Janeway had once been, stripped of all higher reasoning abilities. It was no more a testament to the human condition than an infant's wail.
Having actually missed this the first time around, I'm in the interesting position of being able to compare the version of my original reading to the one actually on page, and I'm honestly not sure which I'd say is better. Without the blip, Janeway's victimization was violent but brief. As written, her victimization must be a prolonged experience of psychological torture as she is forced to watch her body and knowledge be used to kill her colleagues and damn near devastate her civilization, and as the Collective erodes away at her will until there is nothing left except a confused, inchoate mass of residual emotion. This echo does manage to regain a sliver of agency in the end, but is it really worth the extended suffering and torture? I'd say it isn't. It doesn't redeem what was done to her; doesn't even approach it.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Enlighten me.
Where in Roddenberry's vision was the sentence that said "it's important that we not appear sexist, so we're only allowed to kill the male captains."
I do appreciate your opinion, Trent, and I always enjoy reading your posts, but I just have to say that I really do disagree with you here. I'm sorry you found it such an awful experience, but I genuinely did feel he did the character justice. I can see where you're coming from, but I've read and seen so many other stories where characters I've loved have been put through so much worse for much smaller victories that this really felt like a proper sendoff to me.
I'm sorry it didn't work for you, but I did like it, and in no way was that because I disliked the character. I liked it because I liked the character, and felt it did her strength justice.
- Status
Similar threads
