Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers about

[Hober Mallow]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

I never felt the writers ever liked Alexander. The TNG writers had been trying to come up with a story to permanently dump him. They complained to Piller they couldn't come up with stories for him. Piller told them to just not write for him until they came up with a decent story for him rather than dump him altogether.

 

[Anthony Sabre]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

As someone posted earlier, the impact of Ziyal's death was supposed to be the fact that she was the show's one true innocent. She had no shades of gray like the other characters. She wasn't a former Bajoran terrorist, nor was she a casually brutal Cardassian. In effect she was neither Bajoran or Cardassian, although genetically she was both. I agree that her death was melodramatic but for different reasons.

The DS9 writers went over the top with suddenly killing characters at the end of episodes. Too often these deaths came off as shock value instead of having a true significance. During the shows original run, I remember feeling frustrated when I watched the deaths of: Amon Marritza, Li Nalas, Ziyal, Jadzia and even Damar. Now when I rewatch those episodes, I just roll my eyes.

One of the most effectual deaths was Munez in The Ship. What made his death so interesting was the effect it had on O'Brien and Worf, both before and after he died. None of the above deaths seemed to effect the main characters as much.

As for Alexander.... They didn't even know how to do a decent episode with him during TNG's run. DS9 should have just had a throw away line about him and left it at that.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

My take on Ziyal, personally, was that she should have been a he. I understand why they went with a young woman, as Sisko has a son and we want some variety, but I've always had a niggling suspicion that a male Ziyal might have been a little more interesting (not that Ziyal wasn't interesting, but if she were a boy it would feel somewhat more...unusual, like they were doing something different).

 

[Disillusioned]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

I agree about Alexander needing more attention, but I think the problem with Ziyal was basically the same as with Alexander. I did feel Ziyal's death, but it seemed like she was forgotten too soon, and to set it up better they would have had to do more with her beforehand.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

Would it have been interesting to have Ziyal began to change and act more like her father during the occupation which alienated her and Kira. So of course losing her would push Dukat even more off the edge.


Or have her change so much she actually leaves with Dukat to Cardassia, but later he loses her and it does the same thing- push him over the edge.


With Alexander AND Worf, I can see the fault in both of them. Worf just seemed to push Alexander off on his parents and forget about him.

Worf took the Klingon, 'I lead a warrior life' thing way too seriously. Even Martok told him when a son and father don't speak, something's wrong...

Alexander's character of 'it's my choice' 'you don't like me' 'I don't want to be a warrior' over and over again in so many episodes..sometimes it made him look one dimensional...

 

[C_Miller]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

I assumed the "angels" of the title was referring to both Ziyal and the Starfleet crews who had dyed for the war effort. Probably would have made more sense if what happened to Ziyal had been the beginning of Dukat changing into a good person as he realizes all his bad deeds lead to his daughter's death, I suppose, but instead he just went cuckoo.

I always interpreted it as the sacrifice that the prophets said that Sisko would have to make at a later time. Although all three of them could have been acting at once to create the title.

 

[Deckerd]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

I found her so saccharine sweet that it was a positive relief when Damar shot her. I always had a lot of time for Damar.

I liked the Alexander character. He was a good foil to Worf's punctiliousness.

 

[mattyhugh]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

My take on Ziyal, personally, was that she should have been a he. I understand why they went with a young woman, as Sisko has a son and we want some variety, but I've always had a niggling suspicion that a male Ziyal might have been a little more interesting (not that Ziyal wasn't interesting, but if she were a boy it would feel somewhat more...unusual, like they were doing something different).

The dynamic between Ziyal and Dukat might have been slightly more interesting if she was male, but as far as Kira was involved it would have really clouded what the writers were trying to do. As in finding that link between Kira and Dukat forming a psuedo family unit with 'they're' daughter Ziyal at the centre of it.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

My take on Ziyal, personally, was that she should have been a he. I understand why they went with a young woman, as Sisko has a son and we want some variety, but I've always had a niggling suspicion that a male Ziyal might have been a little more interesting (not that Ziyal wasn't interesting, but if she were a boy it would feel somewhat more...unusual, like they were doing something different).

The dynamic between Ziyal and Dukat might have been slightly more interesting if she was male, but as far as Kira was involved it would have really clouded what the writers were trying to do. As in finding that link between Kira and Dukat forming a psuedo family unit with 'they're' daughter Ziyal at the centre of it.

I don't understand what you're saying, i'm afraid. They would still be a pseudo-family (at least in Ziyal's eyes) if she were a he. Why would "their" son make Kira's role in relation to Ziyal any different? He would still be a link between Dukat and Kira.

 

[mattyhugh]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

My take on Ziyal, personally, was that she should have been a he. I understand why they went with a young woman, as Sisko has a son and we want some variety, but I've always had a niggling suspicion that a male Ziyal might have been a little more interesting (not that Ziyal wasn't interesting, but if she were a boy it would feel somewhat more...unusual, like they were doing something different).

The dynamic between Ziyal and Dukat might have been slightly more interesting if she was male, but as far as Kira was involved it would have really clouded what the writers were trying to do. As in finding that link between Kira and Dukat forming a psuedo family unit with 'they're' daughter Ziyal at the centre of it.

I don't understand what you're saying, i'm afraid. They would still be a pseudo-family (at least in Ziyal's eyes) if she were a he. Why would "their" son make Kira's role in relation to Ziyal any different? He would still be a link between Dukat and Kira.

I just think it would have changed the dynamic too much. The major bone of contention where Dukat felt betrayed was because of the Garek angle. Also it is entirely possible that male Ziyal would have developed a crush on Kira instead etc. I guess it wouldn't radically change anything. But warts and all I kind of like it the way it is.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

The dynamic between Ziyal and Dukat might have been slightly more interesting if she was male, but as far as Kira was involved it would have really clouded what the writers were trying to do. As in finding that link between Kira and Dukat forming a psuedo family unit with 'they're' daughter Ziyal at the centre of it.

I don't understand what you're saying, i'm afraid. They would still be a pseudo-family (at least in Ziyal's eyes) if she were a he. Why would "their" son make Kira's role in relation to Ziyal any different? He would still be a link between Dukat and Kira.

I just think it would have changed the dynamic too much. The major bone of contention where Dukat felt betrayed was because of the Garek angle. Also it is entirely possible that male Ziyal would have developed a crush on Kira instead etc. I guess it wouldn't radically change anything. But warts and all I kind of like it the way it is.

D'oh! I was so focused on the Ziyal-Dukat and Ziyal-Kira idea I totally forgot Ziyal-Garak! However, I was never too fond of their "love". I can see why they sought each other out, being the only resident Cardassians, but why did it have to be love? That felt a bit tacky. Was friendship not enough? Let's face it, Dukat hates Garak so much that Garak being anywhere near his child, for whatever reason, is going to be an issue for him.

EDIT: It just occurred to me: Garak's relationship with Ziyal was included to "de-camp" him slightly, wasn't it? A shame. I stand by what I said; Ziyal and Garak should have been friends, not lovers. It's also a shame Garak's mannerisms should be linked to sexuality.

 

[Disillusioned]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

Well, his friendship to Bashir was also somewhat suggestive, at least at first.

 

[mattyhugh]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

See I don't really think Ziyal and Garak were actually lovers. More had a deep friendship biased on their mutual isolation that was in the process of evolving into something more and they were robbed of that. Of course in the long run that little effect on Garak as time went on, which to a certain degree fits his character.

 

[15wss]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

See I don't really think Ziyal and Garak were actually lovers. More had a deep friendship biased on their mutual isolation that was in the process of evolving into something more and they were robbed of that. Of course in the long run that little effect on Garak as time went on, which to a certain degree fits his character.

I have to agree - I preferred to think that Garak and Ziyal found a deep friendship rather than romantic or sexual love. They didn't have the romantic or sexual chemistry based on what I had seen (again, probably because the actresses playing Ziyal weren't consistent) and I remembered feeling a tad uncomfortable about their age differences (unless I'm wrong, Garak was old enough to be her father...).

I could easily understand that the writers didn't want to take it as a friendship, since we've seen Garak being friends or mentor-like with Bashir and I can see that they'd want something different for Garak. But, I kind of thought that Garak's love interest wouldn't be so... innocent. If he had to have a female love interest, she could be sweet, sure, but not one-dimensional - and I kind of felt Ziyal was just not deep enough.

 

[Broccoli]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

I never liked what they did to Alexander on DS9. Yeah, was never a Klingon's Klingon, but he wasn't an incompetent boob either. It felt like a character assassination (even though he really wasn't that much of a character).

See I don't really think Ziyal and Garak were actually lovers. More had a deep friendship biased on their mutual isolation that was in the process of evolving into something more and they were robbed of that. Of course in the long run that little effect on Garak as time went on, which to a certain degree fits his character.

I have to agree - I preferred to think that Garak and Ziyal found a deep friendship rather than romantic or sexual love. They didn't have the romantic or sexual chemistry based on what I had seen (again, probably because the actresses playing Ziyal weren't consistent) and I remembered feeling a tad uncomfortable about their age differences (unless I'm wrong, Garak was old enough to be her father...).

I could easily understand that the writers didn't want to take it as a friendship, since we've seen Garak being friends or mentor-like with Bashir and I can see that they'd want something different for Garak. But, I kind of thought that Garak's love interest wouldn't be so... innocent. If he had to have a female love interest, she could be sweet, sure, but not one-dimensional - and I kind of felt Ziyal was just not deep enough.

I got the impression that she might have been romantically interested, but he wasn't and saw her instead as a kindred spirit.

 

[OldManDax]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

Wow..I sooo disagree with the OP in regards to Ziyal. While the character herself was not especially interesting over the length of her time on the show, I definitely thought the writers made great use of her during the six-parter. In fact, one of the things I loved most about that six-parter - which I always rate infinitely higher than the very flawed Final Chapter - is the way we got to see a number of people (Quark, Kira, Odo, Dukat, Sisko, etc) struggle with their consciences, their core values and presumption, their alliances, etc AND how we were able to see some very unexpected heroism and courage came through at most important points. I also think it was very shrewd giving the audience a very important, visceral sense of what the Bajorans might have experienced during their occupation. Kind of contributed to the way that the characters learned to become comrades-in-arms, though not all clones of each other. Ziyal's arc was a very important part of that (not to mention it solidified for me how despicable Damar - and that almost pathological sense of Cardassian militarism - could be). Ziyal's life and death were very important parts of showing shades of gray in Garak, Kira and Dukat.

Also agree that the writers should have found a way to have Jake and Ziyal at least have a conversation.

Btw, am I the only who figured out that "The Sacrifice of Angels" refers BOTH to Ziyal's death (b/c she was "pure", like "an angel") AND the sacrifice of The Prophets in having to be involved in "corporeal affairs", especially in a way that forced them to sort of follow Sisko's will, instead of the other way around? I mean, its pretty obvious in the ep., I think.

 

[flemm]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

Btw, am I the only who figured out that "The Sacrifice of Angels" refers BOTH to Ziyal's death (b/c she was "pure", like "an angel") AND the sacrifice of The Prophets in having to be involved in "corporeal affairs", especially in a way that forced them to sort of follow Sisko's will, instead of the other way around? I mean, its pretty obvious in the ep., I think.

Yes, the double meaning was my understanding as well.

In the case of Ziyal, she herself is not interesting, but as a cog in the complicated Kira-Dukat, Dukat-Garak and even Kira-Garak relationships, she was effective.

Having Kira develop a strong bond with Ziyal despite her loathing for Dukat was especially significant for the character, I thought. Being able to do this shows a true strength that goes beyond the usual "devotion to duty" or "willingness to sacrifice one's self" that we usually see on Star Trek. Kira is in my opinion one of the strongest, most compelling (and somewhat underappreciated) characters Star Trek has given us, and Ziyal is an important part of her development overall.

A major disappointment was the writer's decision to not follow up on this point when Kira is working with Damar in season seven, but I think I remember reading that the writers just didn't feel they had the time.

As for Alexander, the "doofus" aspect was perhaps overplayed in Sons and Daughters, but I thought this was good character work for Worf, and I don't mind the lack of follow-up, since the situation is essentially resolved. (My initial reaction is to disagree that the wedding episode undoes this resolution, at least that was not my impression, but it has been a while, I would have to rewatch the episode to confirm.)

Some secondary characters on DS9 grew beyond the role of accessory to a main character (Garak, Martok, Nog) that has normally been reserved for this type of character in Trek. Alexander is a traditional accessory, he is there to provide character work for Worf. Ziyal, on the other hand, is a kind of unique DS9 creature, a complex hub of several plot and character related tensions.

 

[OldManDax]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

Btw, am I the only who figured out that "The Sacrifice of Angels" refers BOTH to Ziyal's death (b/c she was "pure", like "an angel") AND the sacrifice of The Prophets in having to be involved in "corporeal affairs", especially in a way that forced them to sort of follow Sisko's will, instead of the other way around? I mean, its pretty obvious in the ep., I think.

Yes, the double meaning was my understanding as well.[/QUOTE]

Thanks. I was really starting to think I was a little crazy or something.

[/quote]In the case of Ziyal, she herself is not interesting, but as a cog in the complicated Kira-Dukat, Dukat-Garak and even Kira-Garak relationships, she was effective.

Having Kira develop a strong bond with Ziyal despite her loathing for Dukat was especially significant for the character, I thought. Being able to do this shows a true strength that goes beyond the usual "devotion to duty" or "willingness to sacrifice one's self" that we usually see on Star Trek. Kira is in my opinion one of the strongest, most compelling (and somewhat underappreciated) characters Star Trek has given us, and Ziyal is an important part of her development overall.[/quote]

I definitely agree with all of this, and you expressed something I wasn't quite capable of expressing myself.

[/quote]A major disappointment was the writer's decision to not follow up on this point when Kira is working with Damar in season seven, but I think I remember reading that the writers just didn't feel they had the time.[/quote]

You know, I never thought about this, but it really does make sense. Though I think I felt that the whole point of Kira having to work with Damar (though admittedly against her will), was that a nice continuation in the her very Trekkian character arc of realizing that even Cardassians have the possibility of changing, of rising above their oppressive history and personal tendencies.

Some secondary characters on DS9 grew beyond the role of accessory to a main character (Garak, Martok, Nog) that has normally been reserved for this type of character in Trek.

This is a great point as well. The three you mentioned DID rise above the "accessory" role into being ALMOST as important as central characters (I would include Dukat, if only b/c of his "dark mirror" role with regards to Sisko and the role he served as a constant reminder of the Cardassian oppression of Bajor).

[/quote]Ziyal...is a kind of unique DS9 creature, a complex hub of several plot and character related tensions.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

 

[flemm]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

You know, I never thought about this, but it really does make sense. Though I think I felt that the whole point of Kira having to work with Damar (though admittedly against her will), was that a nice continuation in the her very Trekkian character arc of realizing that even Cardassians have the possibility of changing, of rising above their oppressive history and personal tendencies.

Oh, I agree with you whole-heartedly here and, while I would like in theory to have seen the question of Ziyal addressed, there was so much going on already that I understand why the writers chose not to complicate matters further.

Now, I am a big fan of Star Trek overall, but it is television, so often my enjoyment is at least slightly tempered by an awareness of the limitations of the medium, the need to spell everything out to make sure everyone gets it, the standard clichés and so on, but there are a few moments on DS9 that have my fullest and sincerest admiration.

One of those is the quick cut to a shrouded and silent Kira while Damar is making his speech urging the Cardassians to rise up and fight for their freedom. The expression on her face is so vivid, and you realize that at this moment she has become a fully realized person and healed the wounds of the occupation that have haunted her for seven years, yet the whole sequence (as it relates to Kira) is so brilliantly understated.

Really one of the finest moments in all of Trek imo

 

[OldManDax]

Re: Alexander & Ziyal shortcomings that I disagree with the writers ab

You know, I never thought about this, but it really does make sense. Though I think I felt that the whole point of Kira having to work with Damar (though admittedly against her will), was that a nice continuation in the her very Trekkian character arc of realizing that even Cardassians have the possibility of changing, of rising above their oppressive history and personal tendencies.

Oh, I agree with you whole-heartedly here and, while I would like in theory to have seen the question of Ziyal addressed, there was so much going on already that I understand why the writers chose not to complicate matters further.

Now, I am a big fan of Star Trek overall, but it is television, so often my enjoyment is at least slightly tempered by an awareness of the limitations of the medium, the need to spell everything out to make sure everyone gets it, the standard clichés and so on, but there are a few moments on DS9 that have my fullest and sincerest admiration.

One of those is the quick cut to a shrouded and silent Kira while Damar is making his speech urging the Cardassians to rise up and fight for their freedom. The expression on her face is so vivid, and you realize that at this moment she has become a fully realized person and healed the wounds of the occupation that have haunted her for seven years, yet the whole sequence is so brilliantly understated.

Really one of the finest moments in all of Trek imo

That's funny...one of the "issues" I had with the Final Chapter is that Damar's speech, while important enough from a narrative perspective, lacked the kind of we-didn't see this-coming-but-this-changes-everything dramatic force that it should have rightly possessed. This was partly, I think, b/c the writers had spent A LOT of time - too much time, IMO, some of which could have been used to, you know, spend on central characters - on showing the Damar/Weyoun fracturing; thus the actual speech lacked the dramatic sense of say, Dukat's announcement that Cardassia was joining the Dominion in Season 5, or of the Klingons pulling out of The Khitomer Accords or even the aforementioned intervention of The Prophets, at Sisko's insistence.

Though it DID fit in quite well with a core DS9 and TOS theme, that was established as far back as "Emissary", and reaffirmed in eps. like "Statistical Probabilities" and even "Sacrifice of Angels", was that unexpected events can affect the outcomes of various events, even the very course of history.

Oh, and please forgive my obviously underdeveloped quotidian skills in my previous post.