Ron Moore's Voyager
- Thread starter Cheewiee
- Start date
But why should they incorporate such an idea in the series? It sounds much too interesting, realistic and dramatic.
Actually, I think that a better plot would have been to keep things as they were for most of the first season, introduce more Maquis characters, and then during Learning Curve have them decide that they have had enough of Janeway and are tired of Chuckels boot licking. The Maquis, en mass, decided that they are tired of Janeway demanding that they be "starfleet" and risking their lives "exploring." Rather than trying to mutiny, they decide that they want out and that they will find their own way home. They demand that Janeway let them off at the next free port. This would have opened so many dramatic possibilities. We could have either seen the two groups go their seperate ways for awhile only to realize that they need EACHOTHER, or Janeway would have been forced to reconsider her strict Starfleet code.
All of the Maquis (AQ and DQ) were not of one mind. Some were for adventure, some idealists, some full of hurt and anger, some mercenary. The point is there was no ONE ideology. Hell, O'Brien sometimes seemed 'this close' to espousing Maquis thoughts.
I keep thinking that the Maquis on Voyager--those who worked and fought under Chakotay--had to have agreed with him to some point, or they'd likely have left his cell or set him up. So, assuming there was some similarity in thought (not identical viewpoint), his crew would be more likely to follow him.
Some of them seemed rather hurt and angry (like Chakotay)--emotionally damaged, lost idealists maybe for some.
Which leads to the fact that, when Janeway would not sell out the Ocampa for personal/political expediency (which is exactly what the Federation did with the Cardassians), she was the Federation captain they would be most likely to be able to follow. After all, she tried to follow the Federation/StarFleet ideals, which would likely appeal to some of the less-extreme Maqus on Voyager as at least somewhat-similar to their own ideals.
I keep thinking that the Maquis on Voyager--those who worked and fought under Chakotay--had to have agreed with him to some point, or they'd likely have left his cell or set him up. So, assuming there was some similarity in thought (not identical viewpoint), his crew would be more likely to follow him.
Some of them seemed rather hurt and angry (like Chakotay)--emotionally damaged, lost idealists maybe for some.
Which leads to the fact that, when Janeway would not sell out the Ocampa for personal/political expediency (which is exactly what the Federation did with the Cardassians), she was the Federation captain they would be most likely to be able to follow. After all, she tried to follow the Federation/StarFleet ideals, which would likely appeal to some of the less-extreme Maqus on Voyager as at least somewhat-similar to their own ideals.
True. The Maquis may have had a cause but they weren't necessarily in if for the same reasons. Even Chakotay and B'Elanna who were friends joined up for different reasons and didn't agree all the time.
He must have been a halfway decent leader if they were willing to follow him so it wouldn't be surprising if they agreed to give it a try for his sake.
I never thought of it this way before but I think you have something here. If Janeway as a Starfleet captain wasn't going to sell out the Ocampa for personal gain while the Federation left them high and dry then maybe she was also someone worth following. Add to that Chakotay saw reason to trust her and they trusted him.
But why should they incorporate such an idea in the series? It sounds much too interesting, realistic and dramatic.
More like time-wasting, predictable and generic. They didn't need to go through some sort of grand epiphany, they already knew from the end of Caretaker that they couldn't afford to waste their time like that and since their leader was the XO they didn't have great cause to rebel or complain about anything other than whether or not they wear a uniform that doesn't mean anything out in the DQ.
If by "character development" you mean "the entire cast are a bunch of psychos who don't really change or grow all that much aside from becoming more nuts", then Moore is your man
.
That's fair enough, but there is one unifying political ideology they all shared: They weren't Federates. They weren't Starfleet. Those were two institutions they had rejected.
That is an excellent point. I don't buy for a second that most of the Maquis would have been willing to become Starfleet, but that would have been an excellent reason for the Maquis to be willing to accept the idea of Janeway being in charge -- and a far better one than, "Well, that's what Starfleet Command would have wanted."
But why should they incorporate such an idea in the series? It sounds much too interesting, realistic and dramatic.
More like time-wasting, predictable and generic.
No, a bunch of people wearing Starfleet uniforms, espousing the Starfleet ideology, and conducting Starfleet-style missions of exploration on the Random Planet of the Week -- which is what we got -- would be time-wasting, predictable, and generic.
Of course they'd still have cause to complain. The XO still has to follow the CO's orders. But why should they have to operate the ship according to the Starfleet command structure? Janeway needed them, too. If I'm Maquis, I'm going to say that the organizational structure of the ship should be completely different, should be completely non-Starfleet. It shouldn't just be putting Maquis people into Starfleet organizational slots.
Maybe the Maquis say there ought to be, say, a governing council for the ship -- a sort of "city council" to Janeway's being the "mayor." Or maybe they'll just demand that major decisions require Chakotay's consent. Or maybe something else. Who knows?
But either way, just making Chakotay the XO isn't enough.
Of course it means something. It speaks to how the ship is run, to what kinds of missions are conducted. It speaks to the personal freedom of everyone aboard the ship.
I suppose you have a distaste for TOS, TNG and DS9 for following the rules as well hm?
And you'd get labeled a rabble-rouser and disruptive sheerly for the sake of being disruptive without offering a decent alternative other than "not starfleet" and dealt with between episodes insteading of having screentime wasted on one whiner.
Seeing how their personal freedoms weren't violated at all as long as they did their damn jobs (which is how ALL of society functions, including the Maquis themselves), they'd have little to complain about how their "freedoms" were being messed with. And seeing how the Fleet way has worked for 200 years by that point, why bother changing what works?
Well, I guess we have to agree to disagree on that. The way I imagine it the Maquis storyline would have been much more entertraining.
Well, then change the end of Caretaker!
I thought we were talking about a What if ... ? scenario here.Then why did they wear it?
I don't have distaste for TOS or TNG because they basically established that formula. You don't get irritated at someone for being repetitive when they're creating a formula that didn't exist before (TOS) or refining it (TNG).
DS9, in my view, didn't follow that formula.
With VOY, I get irritated at them for following that formula because by the time VOY came out, the formula was stale. They needed to do something different, to flex their creative muscles. Take risks.
And that's what it looked like they were doing, too. A third of the crew was composed of separatists who didn't identify with Starfleet and felt betrayed by it. The ship was trapped on the other side of the galaxy, with no Starfleet Command to help them.
But instead, the producers and writers chose to do the same old, same old that they'd done with TOS and TNG -- and did so in an era where other television dramas were growing more and more sophisticated and experimental. VOY, by comparison, felt like it was trapped in the 80s with its writing style.
As a result, VOY was creatively stagnant and never lived up to its own potential. It wasn't a bad show. But it wasn't good, either.
Pardon me. I should have said, "If I'm a realistically-written version of Chakotay, I'm going to say...."
They were literally forced to join the military or else be trapped on the other side of the galaxy. That's not freedom, that's impressment.
Because they weren't Starfleet. They had rejected Starfleet. That's like saying, "Well, hey, the Royal Navy has worked for hundreds of years, so why shouldn't we force you to serve on the HMS Illustrious, Mister American Citizen of the Year 1794?"
If they don't want to be Starfleet -- which they wouldn't if the show had been written realistically -- and if the Starfleet crew needed them to get home -- which they did -- then the Maquis should have gotten some concessions from Starfleet instead of being forced into Starfleet's little boxes.
Or maybe, they just knew all along Starfleet was hardly some kind of fascist dictatorship, would treat it's members well, and since they already had a command structure that wasn't all that different (since Chakotay and plenty of Maquis higher-ups were ex-Fleeters to begin with and would've brought that experience with them) they'd just figure "Okay, it's in our best interests to work with these guys and they aren't bad dudes so why not just co-operate?" instead of "I hate every one of these bastards and I'll do everything in my power to make their lives as miserable as possible unless they hand over the ship even if it means stranding us here forever."
May not be a fascist dictatorship, but there again, Janeway didn't really hesitate to force a bunch of civilians into Starfleet service when it suited her, did she?
You've completely misrepresented the argument that I made. I did not say that they all hated Starfleet and the Federation, and I did not say that they'd do everything they could to make everyone's lives as miserable as possible unless they got control of the ship.
Saying that the ship shouldn't be run according to the Starfleet way is not the same thing as saying that the Maquis should have gotten absolute control. That you're incapable of understanding that it's not a choice between two absolutes -- Starfleet control or Maquis control -- is regrettable.
You've got to quit with those strawmen - nobody is saying that tension = everyone on the ship is a psycho. You are arguing against points nobody is making.
It was good enough to hold it's production cost.
It was good enough to last 7 years.
It was good enough to achieve syndication rights.
It was good enough for merchendising.
It was good enough to make it a well know title.
It was good enough to be used partly to help launch the Las Vegas Experance.
Regardless of what some fans my think, by the studios standards it was successful.
If I may be so bold, these are indeed the questions the show should have addressed on screen.
Technically, it was Captain Janeway's ship.
She had the right to give the orders, and she had an moral (and probably regulation-derived) obligation to take these Maquis on-board when Chakotay's ship was critically damaged. Janeway also had a mission to arrest them, as they are criminals in the eyes of Federation law. In this regard, the Maquis would have never been 'civilian passengers' aboard the ship, they would have been prisoners, and entitled to treatment with both the rights and restrictions of such.
The very question of 'are these noble freedom fighters or are they terrorists?' to me begged for an exploration of what role they should play aboard the ship and how they should be treated. Janeway would have been well within her rights to confine the Maquis to quarters for the duration. Perhaps the Maquis (via Chakotay no doubt) 'plea bargained' for special treatment, and therefore agreed to serve as members of the crew according to Starfleet codes of protocol in exchange for not being confined to quarters for the duration of the journey, in the mutual interest of both parties. In that regard, Janeway would be able to press them into service.
What I'm saying of course is that I believe we should have actually explored this on screen, rather than skipping over it at the end of 'Caretaker' for a trite 'happy ending.'
I see that as one viable outcome of the addressing of those questions, but not necessarily 'the' outcome, not necessarily an immediate outcome, and not necessarily the best outcome. Perhaps, after the 'plea bargain,' the Maquis and Starfleet crew would come to be unified and form a new, special 'family' as the show suggested and as time marched on both crew and Captain would realize that a military hierarchy was no longer an acceptable way to make life and death decisions for people in such extraordinary circumstances?
Here, I see another missed opportunity for dramatic exploration of humanity.
I have to agree.
While we as fans (and indeed even some general television viewers) may recognize the shortcomings of the show and the failure to fully achieve the premise, the producers were able to create a show that despite it's shortcomings does have many redeeming qualities.
It's unfortunate, however, that the show's quality was so inconsistent from episode to episode. It's that failure, and the failure to successfully execute the so well laid out premise, that hurts me most - not because I hate the show, but because I loved the ideas behind it and wish it could have been better.
^^I guess I can say for me personally, I'm grateful for what it was and very careful what I wish for. If we compare it to say a show like HEROES, that's far more inconsistant as well as much more poorly written, Voyager is a diamond in the rough. Plus, I don't see the show as any worse than TNG. When both were good, they were very good. When they were bad, they were bad but the best about both is you can skip the bad and still enjoy the show and keep up with the story.
See, I think that the average quality of VGR was probably almost equal to TNG, but you have a greater contrast of highs and lows... nearly as many '*' episodes as '*****' episodes on VGR. With TNG, I'd argue that most episodes were in the '***' range, with lots more at '****' and '*****' with enough in the '*' range to balance it out. I'd argue that a lot of this was due to the 'franchise fatigue' that contributed to a lack of fresh ideas.
However, add to that the fact that VGR had a precisely defined premise with potential for lots of new stories that could have made for an AMAZING show coupled with the 'generally okay' show what we got, and hopefully everyone can understand where I'm coming from. It's good, but it's still a disappointment.
However, add to that the fact that VGR had a precisely defined premise with potential for lots of new stories that could have made for an AMAZING show coupled with the 'generally okay' show what we got, and hopefully everyone can understand where I'm coming from. It's good, but it's still a disappointment.
Maybe.
.....and while I understand the point of talking about it here is for conversation. The fact is, the show is long over and no amount of us complaining about would "could" have been is going to change it. So we either accept it or learn to move on.
That's why it doesn't matter what Ron Moore wanted or could have done. Just like "Before & After", it didn't happen and never will in any timeline.
We the audience still win because we got both Voyager & nuBSG. If Ron stayed with Voyager, we wouldn't.
