Babylon 5

[RJDiogenes]

It's been years since I last watched the episodes in question, but IIRC Sheridan suspended him indefinitely (after Delenn talked him down), so there were professional repercussions. Most of what he did was covert, so publicly exposing his failure is obviously out of the question and as incompetent as it was, it was hardly a criminal act. I also recall Garibaldi being most definitely contrite in the aftermath, though it's not something that was overly dwelt upon.

I haven't seen the episodes in years, so all I can say is that I was left with the impression that he messed up an operation, got people killed, and walked away not just unscathed, but sitting pretty.

It's not as if Sheridan could or would forbid him from marrying the love of his life or being happy ever again. That'd be nuts.

Of course I wouldn't expect that. Just a little Karma.

The long and short of it is that in real life, you often never get "closure", whatever the hell that really means.

Yes, that's definitely true in real life-- but fiction is held to a higher standard.

 

[Reverend]

Not to start a B5-DS9 argument -- I watched them both religiously -- but I watched B5 for plot and DS9 for characters. The characters on B5 developed because the plot called for them to develop. The characters on DS9 developed as the writers watched the actors play things in unexpected ways and spark chemistry in unexpected places. Doesn't make one better than the other. But the plot vs character thing may be why I have done a DS9 rewatch but not a B5 rewatch so far -- I know what happens in B5, on the one hand, and on the other, I just enjoy watching DS9's characters do their thing.

All just my opinion, of course.

Part of that has to do with the fact that B5 had the bones of an arc for the whole show in place from the offset, where as DS9 was basically just making it up as they went. The former allows you to write living characters in a world and have them shaped by events ways you might not expect. Whereas the latter utterly depends on the characters bouncing off each other to keep things moving forwards over the long term, since there's nothing else connecting the various episodes together.

That's not to denigrate DS9 of course, that's just the way Trek was run back then. Indeed I recall the writing staff were instructed from on high to wrap-up the *whole* Dominion War story by the 4th episode of season 6 and they had to really push for the increased serialization of the show.

So no, I wouldn't characterize B5 as a "plot based show" simply because it had an established story arc. That's like saying for example that the Harry Potter books/films are plot based because JKR had plotted out the Dumbledore/Snape thing from the off and had a good idea how the story would progress from the off. Clearly those stories are character centric, regardless.

Now 'LOST' is what I'd call a plot based show because the plot was literally the *only* thing that seemed to matter to the writers and the characters were fairly incidental. That's not to say they weren't well performed of uninteresting, it's just that the plot came first and the characters were just window dressing.

On B5 the characters are our lens into this world. To go back to the WWII analogy; on a show like say 'Band of Brothers', the focus was clearly the characters as we saw the events of WWII from Normandy onwards through their eyes. Again, no matter what the overarching story of that is going to end with a corpse, covered in petrol on fire in a ditch outside a bunker (or secretly running off to Argentina, if that's the version of history you prefer.) That doesn't make it any less a character based story.

 

[Reverend]

ETA sorry for the double post, I hit "reply" to my last post when I meant to hit "edit".

I haven't seen the episodes in years, so all I can say is that I was left with the impression that he messed up an operation, got people killed, and walked away not just unscathed, but sitting pretty.


Of course I wouldn't expect that. Just a little Karma.


Yes, that's definitely true in real life-- but fiction is held to a higher standard.

Karma? The trouble with this idea is that you almost make it sound like a person should be punished for being sick. Addiction is a disease after all and if someone in a position of responsibility is compromised like that then the system should be capable of detecting it and removing them. Tell you what, since we're both going off old memory, let's have a look of the transcript for the scene: -

- Please, sit.
- If you don't mind, I'd rather stand.
- Suit yourself.
- So...when did you start drinking again?
- Look, if you're gonna fire me, please just do it. Get it over with.
- When did you start drinking again?
- I don't know.
- Not long ago. A couple of months.
- Yeah. That's just about what I figured.
- You knew?
- I suspected. I worried. I tried to convince myself that I was reading too much into the meetings where you were late or unprepared. The recent decline in your performance. You've been under a great deal of pressure lately. What we went through at the end of the civil war, then coming here without even a break in between. I tried to tell myself that it was just the strain of the last year or so. I didn't know for sure until today.
- John, you've got every reason to be angry with me...
- I'm not angry with you. Not now. I was. But Delenn has...a way of looking at things that...No. No, I'm not angry with you. But I am very disappointed, Michael.
- I'd rather have you yelling at me or angry. Anything but disappointed. I know I failed.
- I didn't say I was disappointed in you because of your failure. I'm disappointed because I didn't pick up on this earlier. Disappointed because you felt that you couldn't come to me about this on your own. When Stephen had his problem a couple of years ago I didn't offer my help when I should have and he damn near died trying to deal with his problem on his own. I have made a lot of mistakes, same as everybody else. But I try not to make the same mistake twice.
- So I'm not fired?
- I didn't say that. I can't let this go unanswered. You know that. But on your own the only person you have to worry about hurting or helping is yourself. So, no, you're not fired. But I am placing you on suspension.
- How long?
- Until you work this out.
- That could take a very long time.
- It'll take what it takes. We've had our problems, Michael but I am still your friend. You have to understand that your problem is not between you and me you and your job, or any of that. Your problem is between you and you. And when you've worked this out we'll be here.

Seems like an appropriate response to me. I can't see what would be served by karmically dumping *another* bag of hammers on Garibaldi's head. Seems like he's been though enough already and something like that would only serve to drive him back into the bottle.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Karma? The trouble with this idea is that you almost make it sound like a person should be punished for being sick. Addiction is a disease after all and if someone in a position of responsibility is compromised like that then the system should be capable of detecting it and removing them.

No, I'm not saying that somebody should be punished for being sick, but he was still responsible for somebody's death. It's the equivalent of killing somebody while driving drunk. The driver may have this illness, but he still killed somebody.

Tell you what, since we're both going off old memory, let's have a look of the transcript for the scene: -

Good idea. I do remember that scene now that I read it.

Seems like an appropriate response to me. I can't see what would be served by karmically dumping *another* bag of hammers on Garibaldi's head. Seems like he's been though enough already and something like that would only serve to drive him back into the bottle.

It's a good scene, but still feels inadequate. Doesn't B5 or the Alliance have any employee resources like counseling or something? Just "you're on leave until you get your act together or die?" But the main thing is that his suspension and recidivism became moot, because he became the head of Edgar Industries and never looked back. So it's not about him being punished, but never redeeming himself, or seeming to have any desire to redeem himself.

 

[Reverend]

No, I'm not saying that somebody should be punished for being sick, but he was still responsible for somebody's death. It's the equivalent of killing somebody while driving drunk. The driver may have this illness, but he still killed somebody.

Are you referring to his friend with the contact on Zhabar, or the incident with the Centauri fleets? The former was on his friend just as much as Garibaldi. They were both careless and they paid for it. Also, traffic collision liability hardly applies to covert operations. Things go sideways; people die. But the people responsible for those deaths are the gunman, not the person who failed to prevent the gunman from hitting his target.

In the latter case, again, it was a failure to act at a critical juncture, but the responsibility is still on the captains of the ships that opened fire (or the Drakh controlling the ships as it turned out.) In both cases Garibaldi is guilty of incompetence, not manslaughter.

It's a good scene, but still feels inadequate. Doesn't B5 or the Alliance have any employee resources like counseling or something? Just "you're on leave until you get your act together or die?" But the main thing is that his suspension and recidivism became moot, because he became the head of Edgar Industries and never looked back. So it's not about him being punished, but never redeeming himself, or seeming to have any desire to redeem himself.

I'd hardly say "never looked back" given his involvement in 'A Call to Arms', 'River of Souls' & the final Bester novel. It's not like he spent the rest of his life behind his new desk smoking cigars are reading the sport page. Indeed, his first act as CEO was downright philanthropic. With a single act he cleaned house at one of the main mega-corps responsible for exploiting Mars and gave the newly independent colony world a *huge* leg-up in staying that way.
Granted, it also disposed of several people actively trying to murder him and Lise, but there were other, easier ways he could have dealt with that benefited him more directly.

 

[Forbin]

I haven't done a rewatch, though I have the DVDs, so my memories are 20 years old. But the second half of the second season through to Severed Dreams or so had some of the most intense storytelling I'd seen in SFTV, and it was plot-driven all the way. It was all about putting pieces in place and then setting them into motion. Much the same was true of the Shadow War, though I didn't find it half as interesting as the B5 vs Earthgov stuff. And the impression I get from what little I've read about Crusade suggests the same would have been true there as well if the show had continued.

Not to start a B5-DS9 argument -- I watched them both religiously -- but I watched B5 for plot and DS9 for characters. The characters on B5 developed because the plot called for them to develop. The characters on DS9 developed as the writers watched the actors play things in unexpected ways and spark chemistry in unexpected places. Doesn't make one better than the other. But the plot vs character thing may be why I have done a DS9 rewatch but not a B5 rewatch so far -- I know what happens in B5, on the one hand, and on the other, I just enjoy watching DS9's characters do their thing.

All just my opinion, of course.

I've always said, B5 did the grand story and spectacle better; DS9 did the little personal stories better.

 

[Ion]

I haven't seen the episodes in years, so all I can say is that I was left with the impression that he messed up an operation, got people killed, and walked away not just unscathed, but sitting pretty.

Been a long time since I've watched the series through, but I was under the impression that a lot of what happened with Garibaldi was due to Psi Corp's tampering.

 

[Jan]

Been a long time since I've watched the series through, but I was under the impression that a lot of what happened with Garibaldi was due to Psi Corp's tampering.

By the time Garibaldi got drunk the last time, Bester had released all but a control that kept Garibaldi from extracting revenge. His rationalization for getting drunk was to have some 'control' over his life but that was rather typical for an alcoholic. Yes, Garibaldi went through a *lot* due to the tampering by the Corps, including almost getting executed by the Mars Resistance. But I'm quite sure he could have gotten counseling rather than jumping into a bottle.

 

[MacLeod]

People don't always take what seems to be the most rational course.

 

[Ion]

By the time Garibaldi got drunk the last time, Bester had released all but a control that kept Garibaldi from extracting revenge.

Was this in season 5? It would explain why I don't remember it. I watched it, but it really didn't stick with me.

 

[Jan]

Was this in season 5? It would explain why I don't remember it. I watched it, but it really didn't stick with me.

Yes and no. Bester removed the controls on Garibaldi in'The Face of the Enemy' in season 4. But Garibaldi doesn't get drunk until 'Phoenix Rising' when he meets Bester again and finds out that he's blocked from taking his revenge.

 

[DonIago]

In a way, that seems like a lapse on Garibaldi's part. An underestimation of Bester, if you will. It could probably be argued that Garibaldi should have seen it coming that Bester would have put such a block in place.

OTOH, it could probably be argued that this isn't the first time that Garibaldi underestimated Bester, and perhaps it's even an effect of his programming that with regards to Bester, Garibaldi isn't as paranoid as he probably should be.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Garibaldi didn't think of just having someone else do it.

'Hey, Ivanova, would you mind shooting this mutha?'
'Boom!'

But, B5's not that kind of show.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Are you referring to his friend with the contact on Zhabar, or the incident with the Centauri fleets?

Both. Again, it's been a while, but I recall that he was responsible for the death of one person in particular and a bunch of people in general.

The former was on his friend just as much as Garibaldi. They were both careless and they paid for it. Also, traffic collision liability hardly applies to covert operations. Things go sideways; people die. But the people responsible for those deaths are the gunman, not the person who failed to prevent the gunman from hitting his target.

I see your point, but, on the other hand, being involved in covert operations implies another level of responsibility. Whether you get behind the wheel of a car or take the job of covert operative, you know what you are getting into-- Garibaldi was capable of doing that job if he had been sober.

In the latter case, again, it was a failure to act at a critical juncture, but the responsibility is still on the captains of the ships that opened fire (or the Drakh controlling the ships as it turned out.) In both cases Garibaldi is guilty of incompetence, not manslaughter.

Ultimately, yes, the killers are the killers, but that is cold comfort to the people that Garibaldi let down.

I'd hardly say "never looked back" given his involvement in 'A Call to Arms', 'River of Souls' & the final Bester novel. It's not like he spent the rest of his life behind his new desk smoking cigars are reading the sport page. Indeed, his first act as CEO was downright philanthropic. With a single act he cleaned house at one of the main mega-corps responsible for exploiting Mars and gave the newly independent colony world a *huge* leg-up in staying that way.

I'm not saying Garibaldi was a bad guy by any means, just that that character arc left me unsatisfied.

Been a long time since I've watched the series through, but I was under the impression that a lot of what happened with Garibaldi was due to Psi Corp's tampering.

In the sense that it was the traumatic experience that broke the camel's back.

 

[Reverend]

Both. Again, it's been a while, but I recall that he was responsible for the death of one person in particular and a bunch of people in general.

I see your point, but, on the other hand, being involved in covert operations implies another level of responsibility. Whether you get behind the wheel of a car or take the job of covert operative, you know what you are getting into-- Garibaldi was capable of doing that job if he had been sober.

Actually in cases like this I'm pretty sure the ultimate responsibility is on the whoever sent a drunk out into the field. Sheridan even admits later that he suspected and did nothing.

Ultimately, yes, the killers are the killers, but that is cold comfort to the people that Garibaldi let down.

Who would have no way of knowing Garibaldi was the weak link in the chain in either incident. The freighter pilot was a marked man after surviving the initial attack and I doubt anyone is about to tell any family of his the full story. Most likely he officially went down with his ship due to raider action.
And as for the fleet action, only the crew of the White Star involved would have know that they got no response to their call and wouldn't know it was because Garibaldi was passed out drunk. For all they know it could have been a downed relay, jamming or something else going on. And who's to say it would have made a difference in the long run. The Drakh were determined to provoke a shooting war one way or another, it it wasn't that engagement, it would have been another.

Look at it this way; how many people were caught and killed trying to get though the iron curtain during the Cold War? How many were because of bad luck? Bad timing? How many were intentionally sacrificed as part of a bigger games and how many died due to the personal incompetence of the agents an analysts involved?
We'll never know because it's a *covert* action and it's down the the relevant authorities to deal with their agents an assets as they see fit.
Whatever happens, you can be sure nobody is seeing prison time for what would otherwise be considered murder. Even mass murder sometimes.
The same goes for military engagements. If a reconnaissance analyst screws up it's down to the chain of command to deal with them, which could be anything from punitive duties to a dishonourable discharge.

 

[diankra]

An ongoing problem from season five into the follow-ups is it becomes "The Heroic Adventures of God-Messiah John Sheridan and his Friends". Season four questions Sheridan's messianic tendencies, but then it turns out that's just because Garibaldi's been programmed, so after that, Sheridan can do anything he likes without objections except from obvious villains.

In a functioning free press democracy, the Sheridan administration wouldn't last a week:
His Vice-President is his wife, who's also an influential figure in the alien race that almost wiped out Earth 20 years ago (and, to separate out public interest from tabloid interest, someone who had a sex change within the last five years).
His head of covert security is a functioning alcoholic who betrayed him a year earlier due to brainwashing (not his fault, but don't just give him a top job!!!).
And his successor as CO of the most important space station in the quadrant is his ex-wife (who's also a recovering drug addict: again, separating public interest from interesting to the public).

If there is a functioning press and political system. then Sheridan would be facing congressional challenges for crony-ism from day one.
But... after Clark, maybe there isn't a functioning press. That's certainly the way Sheridan acts in later episodes, treating all journalists as lying propagandist scum who are fair game to be humiliated (and after Illusion of Truth, he has good reason to feel like that). But... one of the great things about season one was the feeling of a real complex political culture back home, and a great failing of season five and afterwards is an absence of any notion that rebuilding a democracy after the Clark dictatorship might be even more of a task than holding an Interstellar Alliance together.

 

[Jan]

If there is a functioning press and political system. then Sheridan would be facing congressional challenges for crony-ism from day one.
But... after Clark, maybe there isn't a functioning press. That's certainly the way Sheridan acts in later episodes, treating all journalists as lying propagandist scum who are fair game to be humiliated (and after Illusion of Truth, he has good reason to feel like that). But... one of the great things about season one was the feeling of a real complex political culture back home, and a great failing of season five and afterwards is an absence of any notion that rebuilding a democracy after the Clark dictatorship might be even more of a task than holding an Interstellar Alliance together.

There couldn't be congressional challenges because there was no congress in the Interstellar Alliance - only an Advisory Board. Why would there be a feeling of 'rebuilding a democracy after the Clark dictatorship' when that had A) to do with the Earth Alliance which is simply a member and B) by ensuring that Sheridan left Earthforce, they made it clear that they didn't want his help in any way. All of the member worlds were autonomous except when it came to interstellar relations. Sure, in the first season, being an Earth Alliance station, there was a feeling of what happened on Earth. After the Civil War and Sheridan's resignation, Earth was very much not the focal point of the story.

 

[diankra]

There couldn't be congressional challenges because there was no congress in the Interstellar Alliance - only an Advisory Board. Why would there be a feeling of 'rebuilding a democracy after the Clark dictatorship' when that had A) to do with the Earth Alliance which is simply a member and B) by ensuring that Sheridan left Earthforce, they made it clear that they didn't want his help in any way. All of the member worlds were autonomous except when it came to interstellar relations. Sure, in the first season, being an Earth Alliance station, there was a feeling of what happened on Earth. After the Civil War and Sheridan's resignation, Earth was very much not the focal point of the story.

Fair points, but unless the ISA is a benevolent dictatorship (an oxymoron), then the most important task of its first leader is establishing free oversight. Otherwise it will become a tyranny, and the Rangers are starting to make the Nightwatch seem... acceptable... by the end.

 

[Brolan]

The bit with Garibaldi and the White Star was the stupidest writing in the show. We have a fleet of ships that needs instant responses to questions and we are going to assign it to just one guy that may be sleeping, showering, or taking a crap at the time they call, delaying his response. And then he is supposed to be calling Sheridan who might also be doing one of those same things, delaying it further. It was designed to fail, and it did.

If you wanted it to work you would have assigned to the bridge or a command center that was manned 24/7 with some standing orders.

 

[Jan]

Fair points, but unless the ISA is a benevolent dictatorship (an oxymoron), then the most important task of its first leader is establishing free oversight. Otherwise it will become a tyranny, and the Rangers are starting to make the Nightwatch seem... acceptable... by the end.

That may have almost been the intent. In one proposed outline of the events of the fifth season, a person was supposed to feature in a number of episodes who claimed to be a future version of Sheridan & Delenn's son David who's come back to warn against becoming tyrants. As it was, we saw Sheridan go from railing against governments that do things the convenient way, to being one of those inconveniences himself and then complaining about how inconvenient Byron's demand for a planet was. What we saw was Sheridan learning his job.